>photons have momentum despite having no mass Is this just

>>8997472
Pretty much. The established formula was [math] p = mv [/math] and as m=0 then naturally p=0 (if you know your math) but having everything solved means no grant money, nor no popsci money. Therefore physicists now have to invent some kind of special case around everything to still make money.

It is pretty sad if you ask me. Physics is literally useless nowadays. Just a bunch of scam artists.

>>8997481
p/m=v
For limit m ->0, v goes to infinity.
Speed of light btfo

File: 1492835946391.jpg (23KB, 552x468px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 552x468px

what if photons have negligible but nonzero mass?

>>8997481
>>8997490
>argues against the momentum of a photon
>only uses Newtonian equations for particles travelling at light speed
>clearly has no knowledge of relativity and why it was introduced

I really hope this is Poe's law in effect

>>8997501
Then they couldn't go at the speed of light.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy%E2%80%93momentum_relation

>>8997472
momentum has units kg m/s
for photons p=h/w
h = planck constant, units kg m^2/s
w = wavelength, units m
units of p are kg m/s which is a momentum

>>8997472
no. I think this is just another case of "didn't study special relativity"

>>8997481
>thinks p=mv is the only dispersion
kekking

>>8997501
They do, for all practical purposes we can neglect it since they're the lightest particles

>>8997472
No, it is not the same as dark matter.

E^2 =( mc^2)^2 + pc^2
Is a direct result of the Lorentz transformations.

The assumption to get this result is energy and momentum are conserved. There are models where this doesn't hold, so photons don't have momentum but without conservation, you end up with other problems, so we decided to keep it and just accept it. Also, photons have angular momentum even though they're not spinning, which is also weird.

>>8997510
>implying light could move at any speed other than the speed of light
wew lad

>>8997481
This and also not