How many times do you need to be told that $$E=mc^{2}$$ doesn't apply to the photon!!!
No one in the physics community has
ever said that. They have said $$E^{2} = (mc^{2})^{2} + (pc)^{2}$$ applies to it. If you can't even ask relevant viable questions your entire contribution to this and any other thread in regards to the photon is undermined.
Since when is the mainstream physics community made up of internet forums? It isn't. While there's 'interested people' on this forum there's very few people who are actually doing physics research. Ben, Prometheus, myself, Guest and CptBork are actually in the physics or maths research communities. Yes, there's plenty of confusion on internet forums but thats because the people on said internet forums are
not actively studying mathematics or physics so they are not aware
precisely of what the mainstream community does. You're not looking at the mainstream community and yet you're claiming there's confusion. How can you not see that its
stupid to evaluate the research community without looking
at the research community. If you claim something about the mainstream community then you should be looking at textbooks and papers, not forums. If there's confusion in the research community it should be evidence at places like
www.arxiv.org, where you'll find research papers from the majority of the community.
If you can't even look at the right material you have no right to complain people aren't doing things properly.
How is that Wikip quote relevant? It doesn't back up your claim the Higgs isn't a serious pursuit, it does the opposite.
What reading? You haven't read any books or papers. You have no information which comes from the research community directly, you seem to get all your information second or third hand via forums or pop science articles. Your research doesn't seem to involve doing anything active.
The existence of the photon and the nature of SR are seperate things. SR can be invalid yet our experimental results for the photon will be unchanged. The photon could not exist (if your ramblings are vaguely right, which they aren't) and yet SR would remain. You have made the mistake of making them equivalent. And the Higgs is a prediction of quantum field theory which is built on quantum mechanics and special relativity. The prediction of the Higgs would not have been made without special relativity because otherwise you don't have quantum field theory.
That's the reason I'm shitty with you, you just make things up about topics you have absolutely no knowledge of. I am not shitty with you because I fear you or anything like that, I don't lose a nanosecond of sleep about anything you've said, you're a nut who'll amount to nothing. I'm shitty with you because I dislike wilful ignorance and intellectual dishonesty in people and you have it in spades. You lie again and again and you lie about something I know about. You're effectively telling me my job when you know nothing about my job. When you piss on someone's shoes don't be surprised when they aren't pleasant to you. I know you
desperately want to validate yourself by convincing yourself you're making the mainstream community worried but you aren't. You're just a pathetic hack who is desperately lying to convince yourself you aren't a failure in physics.
Its due to the dimensionality of large scale space. Anyone whose seen generalised Schwarzchild solutions or done string theory knows why we see gravity have an inverse square law. You're not putting forth any new ideas QQ and you'd know that if you bothered to open a book and not just read internet forums.
Those are flat out lies. Provide a quantitative accurate model for
one, just
one, phenomenon. To be '100% accurate' you must have a quantitative model. Given you can't do even high school mathematics I don't believe your claim. If you can't justify these claims you'll be (again) demonstrating you're a massive hypocrite by complaining the mainstream is supposedly not justifying their claims while you just make shit up and never justify it.
