The Discovery of Photon Mass Supports the Theory of Photons Having a Gravitational Effect

[MaxGaofeiYan]

Recently, a very interesting paper was published in the Astrophysical Journal, titled "Bounding the Photon Mass with Ultrawide Bandwidth Pulsar Timing Data and Dedispersed Pulses of Fast Radio Bursts" by Yu-Bin Wang et al. This paper bounds the possible mass of photons by observing frequency-dependent effects.

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/1538-4357/ad2f99

In March 2020, we published a paper titled "Unified Field Theory for Gravity and Electromagnetism and Its Explanation for Dark Matter Observations," which explains how electromagnetic waves or photons can have a gravitational effect similar to baryonic matter.

https://zenodo.org/records/4057270#.YPOcr0wpDIW

In our paper, we derived equations for the force between photons or between a photon and matter with mass. You can find the details of this relationship.

https://zenodo.org/records/4541280#.YPOcfUwpDIW

The conclusion in Mr. Wang's paper about the nonzero mass of photons supports and enhances the "Unified Field Theory for Gravity and Electromagnetism." The empirical evidence of photon mass provides a basis for further exploration of gravitational interactions involving photons, aligning with the unified field theory's broader claims about the interplay between gravity and electromagnetism.

Dark matter is light (gravitational effect of EM waves, Photons).

 

[maglioned]

Since the photon is energy, according to the theory of relativity, it is enough to generate gravity. Mass does not necessarily have to exist to generate gravity.

 

[MaxGaofeiYan]

Since the photon is energy, according to the theory of relativity, it is enough to generate gravity. Mass does not necessarily have to exist to generate gravity.

Thank you for your post.

 

[MaxGaofeiYan]

This research by Mr. Wang is not the first to support the theory that photons or EM waves exert gravitational force. Last year, a paper published in Nature Astronomy by the University of Hong Kong provided evidence that dark matter is wave-like. This discovery marks a significant milestone in our understanding of this enigmatic substance.

You can find the paper here: Einstein rings modulated by wavelike dark matter from anomalies in gravitationally lensed images.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41550-023-01943-9

At that time, we posted on this forum: We predicted years ago that dark matter behaves wave-like.

https://forums.space.com/threads/we-predicted-years-ago-that-dark-matter-behaves-wave-like.61504/

 

[MaxGaofeiYan]

The mainstream scientific community still questions the new gravity theory that photons or EM waves exert gravitational force. Here, Dr. Ethan Siegel kindly offers his disagreement with our hypothesis in his article, "If photons have mass, could they explain dark matter?"

You can read his argument here:

https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/photons-mass-dark-matter/

Please take a look at his argument to get both sides of the opinion.

 

[Atlan0001]

It is from the fundamental -- the massless point-portal primal -- photon that all other of the quantum realm's particles, and all "observable universes," issue.

 

[Gibsense]

Recently, a very interesting paper was published in the Astrophysical Journal, titled "Bounding the Photon Mass with Ultrawide Bandwidth Pulsar Timing Data and Dedispersed Pulses of Fast Radio Bursts" by Yu-Bin Wang et al. This paper bounds the possible mass of photons by observing frequency-dependent effects.

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/1538-4357/ad2f99

In March 2020, we published a paper titled "Unified Field Theory for Gravity and Electromagnetism and Its Explanation for Dark Matter Observations," which explains how electromagnetic waves or photons can have a gravitational effect similar to baryonic matter.

https://zenodo.org/records/4057270#.YPOcr0wpDIW

In our paper, we derived equations for the force between photons or between a photon and matter with mass. You can find the details of this relationship.

https://zenodo.org/records/4541280#.YPOcfUwpDIW

The conclusion in Mr. Wang's paper about the nonzero mass of photons supports and enhances the "Unified Field Theory for Gravity and Electromagnetism." The empirical evidence of photon mass provides a basis for further exploration of gravitational interactions involving photons, aligning with the unified field theory's broader claims about the interplay between gravity and electromagnetism.

Dark matter is light (gravitational effect of EM waves, Photons).

Time presses so this response is to remind me via "threads with your posts" to get an easy way back!

 

[Greenlight]

if photons have gravity, then if photons are moving away from the observable universe, would that not affect the Lorentz scalar of this observable universe?

what would a slow change in Lorentz scalar over time look like? expansion?

 

[Questioner]

Mass does not necessarily have to exist to generate gravity.

Gravity IS the interaction of mass fields,
namely/specifically the relative space deficit aspect of of mass fields.

Photons have energy so at a minimum they have relative mass.

Whether there could be a relative space deficit without time dilation is unknown,
but I am pretty sure that hasn't been observed in nature.

Most physicists haven't even figured out mass fields have a relative space deficit in the first place.

Trying to explain gravity as purely a function of time dilation is contradictory confusion at best.

 

[Atlan0001]

if photons have gravity, then if photons are moving away from the observable universe, would that not affect the Lorentz scalar of this observable universe?

what would a slow change in Lorentz scalar over time look like? expansion?

If [those] photons are discovered to have measurably finite mass, then they are no longer photons but something else. All microcosmic quantum particles, and macrocosmic "observable universes" too, with only the possible exception of strong interaction's 'gluon' of 'unity' ('1') are out of . . . from . . . measurably finite massless photons.

Asymptotic massless-ness never actually reaches zero, though, just goes immeasurably infinitesimal (therefore immeasurably infinite (infinite zero)) in mass-energy. The root of "infinitesimal" just happens to be "infinite" in the equal but opposite direction and magnitude. "Finite" is, of course, always local-relative base.

 

[Greenlight]

If [those] photons are discovered to have measurably finite mass, then they are no longer photons but something else. All microcosmic quantum particles, and macrocosmic "observable universes" too, with only the possible exception of strong interaction's 'gluon' of 'unity' ('1') are out of . . . from . . . measurably finite massless photons.

Asymptotic massless-ness never actually reaches zero, though, just goes immeasurably infinitesimal (therefore immeasurably infinite (infinite zero)) in mass-energy. The root of "infinitesimal" just happens to be "infinite" in the equal but opposite direction and magnitude. "Finite" is, of course, always local-relative base.

Seems to me that each photon that left the observable universe would cause a reduction in mass of the observable universe in the amount E/c^2.

 

[ZZTOP]

Recently, a very interesting paper was published in the Astrophysical Journal, titled "Bounding the Photon Mass with Ultrawide Bandwidth Pulsar Timing Data and Dedispersed Pulses of Fast Radio Bursts" by Yu-Bin Wang et al. This paper bounds the possible mass of photons by observing frequency-dependent effects.

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/1538-4357/ad2f99

In March 2020, we published a paper titled "Unified Field Theory for Gravity and Electromagnetism and Its Explanation for Dark Matter Observations," which explains how electromagnetic waves or photons can have a gravitational effect similar to baryonic matter.

https://zenodo.org/records/4057270#.YPOcr0wpDIW

In our paper, we derived equations for the force between photons or between a photon and matter with mass. You can find the details of this relationship.

https://zenodo.org/records/4541280#.YPOcfUwpDIW

The conclusion in Mr. Wang's paper about the nonzero mass of photons supports and enhances the "Unified Field Theory for Gravity and Electromagnetism." The empirical evidence of photon mass provides a basis for further exploration of gravitational interactions involving photons, aligning with the unified field theory's broader claims about the interplay between gravity and electromagnetism.

Dark matter is light (gravitational effect of EM waves, Photons).

If photons have mass then how do they travel only at light speed and if true literally all of physics needs to be rewritten. Also where does the mass go when the light is turned off and wouldn't the Earth be larger from being constantly bombarded with photons from the sun?

 

[Atlan0001]

Seems to me that each photon that left the observable universe would cause a reduction in mass of the observable universe in the amount E/c^2.

You are seeing both your math and the physic wrong. The mass result from E/c^2 is exactly the same mass as goes into E=mc^2. No difference.

I did read somewhere at one time that 'c^2' can only, in fact, ultimately equal 'c'. The difference is in its use as a conversion factor, mass to energy and energy to mass . . . mass-energy inverse squaring or the potential particular mass acceleration in expansion. Say, the mass of the universe c-squaring and resulting in its energy.

The problem becomes, I've read from Hawking, the mass and energy of the universe have been calculated to net zero, identical to the net space and time of the universe. Accelerating contractions of the overall universe has to exactly balance accelerating expansion of the overall universe to net that zeroing of mass and energy, space and time, and come out of that mutual cancelation local-relative results, I would suppose.

 

[ZZTOP]

You are seeing both your math and the physic wrong. The mass result from E/c^2 is exactly the same mass as goes into E=mc^2. No difference.

I did read somewhere at one time that 'c^2' can only, in fact, ultimately equal 'c'. The difference is in its use as a conversion factor, mass to energy and energy to mass . . . mass-energy inverse squaring or the potential particular mass acceleration in expansion. Say, the mass of the universe c-squaring and resulting in its energy.

The problem becomes, I've read from Hawking, the mass and energy of the universe have been calculated to net zero, identical to the net space and time of the universe. Accelerating contractions of the overall universe has to exactly balance accelerating expansion of the overall universe to net that zeroing of mass and energy, space and time, and come out of that mutual cancelation local-relative results, I would suppose.

Taking Hawking seriously when he wrote that nothing can escape a BH, before he wrote that everything escapes a BH is itself a problem.

 

[Classical Motion]

I don’t believe this is a discovery. It’s just a useless and miss-directing math path. A math possibility. Not a physical possibility.

A photon has no mass. Mass is the property of inertia. And a photon has none. It can change direction without impedance. Without even time. Inertia uses time, it takes time. Time to change.

But a photon does have momentum. Momentum without mass. Density is all that’s needed for momentum.

Our miss-conception of light gives us spacetime and expanding space. And background radiation.

Light is an intermittent field, not a particle and not a wave.

The mysterious so called duality of light is this intermittent field. A duty cycle of field.

The so called photon energy equation is only a part of the emission. That part is the torque part of the photon, and that torque does not fade with distance. But even that part is described wrong in that photon energy equation. A false equation.

But it will continue because they miss-understand what a physical photon is. It only has a ½ WL duration, not a full wavelength. ½ period. The second half of the period comes from the mass reaction to the first ½ period, not the photon. The mass reaction is equal and opposite. And you think it’s frequency, but it’s just a mass bounce. Mass reaction.

The linear momentum decreases at inverse square of distance. Because the density does. But the torque interaction of a photon is constant for 13 billion years of flight. That ½ period of emission never changes…… only the space between those periods does.

But science knows nothing of this.

If you change your star light processing from alternating wave processing, back to inverted duty cycle processing, this universe will look a lot different and a lot clearer. PLUS we would be able to measure distance with a lot more accuracy.

Starlight without distortion. Remove the mass bounce.

Only then, can space expansion be detected and measured.

All of science is based on light. We ought to measure it. This is more important than going to Mars.

 

[MaxGaofeiYan]

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_P6WIRnweRo&t=4s


This YouTube video, "The Nightmare Scenario for Dark Matter is Inching Closer" by Dr. Sabine Hossenfelder, discusses the repeated failures of experiments and observations related to the belief that dark matter consists of particles. It's truly a nightmare for particle physicists.

 

[Classical Motion]

If a photon has mass, then that mass is always dissolving. Photons lose density and “weight” as they fly. But they NEVER lose their length.

Low frequency photons can be emitted at different “weights”. But high frequency photons like light…. Can not change their emitted weight. Can not change their emitted density.

A 1 megacycle radio signal can emit a 10 watt photon or a 1000 watt photon. But a star can only emit one power level light photon. All light photons have the same power level.

With a 1 megacycle photon the power can be varied……. but not a light photon.

In order to increase the light power, another emitter must be added. That’s the only way you can increase light. You have to produce a flux of many emitters. A flux of light.

500 nanometer light or any high frequency light is quantum in the sense of emitted power level. JUST ONE QUANTUM. One emitted level. And that photon dissolves as it flies.

Where does the photon’s mass go? Space must have mass too.

It has everything else. Space…. the mother of matter. Mother of force and properties.

What nonsense. Silly science.

 

[billslugg]

If photons lose energy as they travel, where does that lost energy go?

 

[Classical Motion]

The energy spreads and dissolves into space. In theory the density lost can continue long after it becomes so weak it wouldn't effect any mass. And it becomes part of the orphan wave background static. A lot of multi-directional orphans become a static blanket.

 

[Classical Motion]

The photon energy from the formula only describes the constant length and torque delivered by the photon. And it's a little off.

 

[Questioner]

If photons lose energy as they travel, where does that lost energy go?

Doesn't it just get turned into expanding space?

 

[Questioner]

(Copy from another post)

Why Light/EM Can Not Have the Gravitational Effect Response

Gravity is a function of a time & space variable distribution of mass across a non-zero span of tidally differentiated space[-time].

Unless one can demontrate redistributions of a photon's relative mass across its superposition occupation my guess is that it doesn't.

Relative mass is a function of accumulated vector inertia energy.
That vector energy would be distributed across the extent of superposition occupation, based on its movement differentiated relationship with contextual space-time itself.

Since space-time itself is not going to change the only possible responsiveness is in the shape of the probability wave occupation.

The movement is the mass source.

One can't move the movement after it happens & since that is where the mass comes from one can't shift that mass.

The mass runs with the movement so shifting it is impossible.

Without shiftable mass gravity acceleration doesn't happen.

QED