Photons are sort of in a class of their own... despite the fact that they can exert force (as with a heliotrope), and can be influenced by gravity ("gravity lens" effect), they have no mass (as we understand it).
http://www.usatoday.com/weather/resourc ... onmass.htmBut assuming they do have mass , consider the total mass of a bunch of photons streaming out of a light bulb... despite their velocity, the kinetic energy involved is like nothing compared to, say, hurricane-force wind entering the same house through an open door. A massive electron discharge would do more damage (although mostly due to disturbing the volume of air inside the house).
This is why a solar sail needs to be much, much larger in proportion to the payload it's moving than a sail on a boat, even though in space there is no resistance of air and water. In fact, a solar sail really wouldn't work in any environment other than space-grade vacuum, as far as I know... and even in space, it would take a looooong time for the sail to accelerate its payload anywhere near the speed of light.
From the article above:
"A particle like a photon is never at rest and always moves at the speed of light; thus it is massless," says Dr. Michael S. Turner, chair of the Department of Astrophysics at the University of Chicago."
This is were I think the mistake was made. According to Einstein, two things happen as an object nears light speed. One is the time dilation effect, where as the passage of time slows down for that object, relative to the rest of the 3D universe, and two, as that object approaches the speed of light, it becomes infinitely massive, which is why it's believed nothing can travel faster than 186,000mps.
Time and space are linked. It stands to reason, that if you're working with a calculation, and you see that one of those factors is being reduced, the other must be proportionately reduced as well. So I propose that the object that's nearing light speed isn't increasing in mass, but instead, 3D space around that object is collapsing. Eliminate time, eliminate space.
A photon COULD then have mass (which is why gravity pulls light) it simply isn't in our 3D universe. Then where is it?
It's skirting just outside the space/time continuum. Just as a super-sonic aircraft produces a shockwave, so too do photons when they pass the "light barrier". The resulting "shockwave" would be the light waves we see.
Now, if this is true, then it's anyones guess WHERE those photons actually are, but where ever that "place" is, gravity exerts it's influence there as well, which would make a very real place indeed. Could this be the fourth dimension everyone speaks of?
Not only that, but light WOULD be made up of two parts, both particles AND waves. The waves that we see in 3D space, and the particle "somewhere" else. The particle half of light would need be traveling FASTER than 186,000mps in order to stay outside the 3D universe. (Which, needless to say, would mean that "thing's" CAN excede 186,000mps)
Now correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't these ideas make more sense, then having all those "special" rules, and exceptions to those rules, to explain the behavior of certain things in our universe?
Not to mention, the potential amount of energy that could be produced, if one were able to slow those photons down, just enough to bring them into 3D space.