Einstein told us that the speed of light must always, not only appear, but BE the same in every frame of reference no matter how fast we are moving towards or away from it. So even if you are moving at half the speed of light towards a light beam, the entire universe must conspire to either "speed up" or slow down your "time" to account for this difference.
If that makes sense to you, you are no longer sane. You cannot create scenarios of two mutually exclusive events at the same time and call that reality. This is fundamental to reason.
To show this contradiction, consider you are running away from a light beam and towards another at the same time. You move at half the speed of light. Of course in real life you will encounter the light you are moving towards first, but in Einstein's universe both beams MUST (in your world) hit you at the same time. However, in Einstein's universe, someone else will see them hit you at different times because they also MUST see light travel at a certain speed. This is just plain fucking stupid.
At best you can have an illusory effect, but to confuse that with a real difference in simultaneity is to truly give up on reason itself.
a) -ist (physicist) implies ones consent to a suggested -ism (physicalism)...which in return tempts one to ignore physic/physis/bheue - "to be; to grow". Why? Because nature sets each being apart from one another to allow growth, which consent contradicts by tempting together.
b) Connecting minds impair each others free will of choice with consent aka contraction into conflicts of reason against each other and accumulation of suggested information burdening memory.
c) Ones consent makes one dependable to the suggestion of another...that's the foundation of relativism.
a) Few utilize "Einstein" to suggest information, which when consented to by ones free will of choice, aggregates many (us) under a few chosen (((ones)))
b) Nature doesn't tell/tale/talo/del - "to recount; relate in detail"...those within nature relate tales to each other to distract from nature. These tales imply suggested relativism tempting ones consent to relate.
Who can measure light? Can a ray within the visible spectrum of light measure light or only other rays of light?
What if speed of light is constant so that each different ray within can have a fluctuating perspective?
Responding simultaneous tempts one to ignore being different from one another.
Nature gives perceivable...those within take suggested from one another, which establishes reason/logic within self and against each other.
Try resisting the temptation to take a side within a suggested conflict of reason like for example...upvote vs downvote. What does one give up by resisting temptation?