Sparky: "...that does not seem to obey Newton?s laws, but has a set of law all it's own."
Sparky, it seems we are back to the scientific truth game. What you just wrote is patently untrue. Light obeys Newtons laws,semiclassically, in SR and in GR. As you noted below, with zero acceleration.
Sparky:"So far as any experiment that we could think of, light always comes away with no mass and no inertia."
Patently untrue. The mass of a photon of frequency f is m=hf/c^2. And as such, it has inertia. Bending of light rays around a planet was one of the experiments that confirmed Einstein's GR. What a photon does not have is REST MASS, i.e. mass at zero speed.
"Think that your microwave can block the microwave photons from getting out of your oven by using a metal grid with holes in it."
Wrong. The microwave is a resonant cavity with absorbtion. The walls of the microwave and the air inside absorb the microwaves in the absence off anything inside.
Sparky:"The photons must in some sense be larger than the holes. Increase the hole size and they can get out. The curious thing is if you leave the door cracked they will get out. They can get out though a very thin crack that is longer than their size."
It has no bearing on the size of the photons, this is a quite childish argument, not to mention incorrect. The phenomenology is comp[letely different.
Sparky: "As the energy gets higher, the photons can get though smaller holes, but they get adsorbed easier."
Wrong again. The more energetic the photons, the lower the absorbtion. At high energies for example, metals become transparent for photons,i.e. there is no absorption.Why do you think they use X-rays and gamma rays in airport security scanners for the luggage instead of visible light?
Come on, Sparky, what is wrong with you? Just look how many patently false statements you made in only one post!
