Lest anyone should think I am arguing against Miles Mathis, let me be clear that I have no vested interest in whether or not photons travel through time in what might be considered as their frame of reference, if they had one. All I am really interested in is why people believe what they do. I am perfectly content to say “I don’t know”, but doesn’t stop from speculating, then I want to know how reasonable my speculations are.
Just a couple of thoughts arising from the Mathis article.
The question is about the photon's own clock.
The photon has no F of R in which to have a clock. Trying to reason from what a non-existent clock, in a non-existent F of R might show is, surely, pure speculation, whichever side of the argument it is applied to.
Since you see light moving relative to you, light must see you moving relative to it.
Does this mean that the “rules” of relative motion apply to light, but the equations do not?
