If anyone here recalls how Einstein came to create the special theory of relativity then you'll recall that he once contemplated what it would be like to ride along next to a beam of light, i.e. to be at rest in a frame where there was an electromagnetic wave.
Einstein realized that in that frame there'd be a spatially oscillating magnetic field at right angle to a spatially oscillating magnetic field. He realized that in that frame the fields would violate the laws of electromagnetism. As Einstein recalled
...a paradox upon which I had already hit at the age of sixteen: If I pursue a beam of light with the velocity c (velocity of light in a vacuum), I should observe such a beam of light as an electromagnetic field at rest though spatially oscillating. There seems to be no such thing, however, neither on the basis of experience nor according to Maxwell's equations. From the very beginning it appeared to me intuitively clear that, judged from the standpoint of such an observer, everything would have to happen according to the same laws as for an observer who, relative to the earth, was at rest. For how should the first observer know or be able to determine, that he is in a state of fast uniform motion? One sees in this paradox the germ of the special relativity theory is already contained.
Einstein realized that if he were to chase and catch up with the wave and be moving with it He would see a frozen light wave that violates Maxwell’s equations. Since the first postulate requires the laws of physics be the same in all frames of reference then there can be no frame in which light is at rest. This is therefore another proof that light has no rest frame. It follows directly that a photon has no rest frame since photons are merely particles of light. Therefore any claim that there is a need of yet another postulate requiring that there be no rest frame of light is preposterous. Only someone who doesn’t know relativity could come to such a bogus conclusion.
