sci.physics.particle

On Mar 29, 3:26=A0pm, Darwin123 wrote:
> =A0 =A0 Photons have zero REST MASS, not zero total mass. Since photons
> can never be found at rest, each photon has a nonzero total mass.

wrong and assbackwards--read my post

> =A0 =A0 If you don't believe A. Einstein, read H. A. Lorentz.
> Electromagnetic waves have a nonzero inertial mass. Particles have
> mass associated with motion which can be explained by the force fields
> the particles drag along. The idea of light being bent is merely an
> application of the Law of Equivalence (Einstein's) to the concept of

El=E8ctric fields ride on gravital fields; el=E8ctric waves ride on the
same. The waves don't holdan mass by definiion; they /do/ mass. If
liht had mass--which it can't any more than $1 hav mass--then beams
and likenesses of everything would ooze toward their attractors.
Fot=F2ns would continually split and breed at lower energies until
everything met infrared death.

> electromagnetic mass (Lorentz). It sounds like you are knocking
> Lorentz's idea, not Einstein's. Light is not massless in the way you
> imply, and no modern physicists ever claimed it was so. =A0You are
> knocking a straw man.

Speak to the PDG or shut up.

> =A0 =A0 =A0Since electromagnetic waves have inertial mass, it is pretty mu=
ch
> a trivial extrapolation to infer they have gravitational mass. If you
> want, you can claim that A. Einstein made a trivial extrapolation from
> the work of A. Lorentz. Some may think it unfair to Einstein, but it
> would make more sense than your idiotic "massless photon" analogy. If
> this doesn't work, you can try calling H. A. Lorentz an idiot.

Ye're all m=F2roi.

-Aut