[Yahya (OP)]

I think I can calculate the amount of stored energy :

just for reference :
I said if there is a piece of iron near a permanent magnet and this magnet looses its magnetism then there should be work done if there are more pieces more energy should be there and so on. but this energy is finite and has a particular number.

suppose we have two masses M and m , let mass M be fixed in space and let mass m be put in every possible position in space , the potential energy from infinity to schwarzschild  radius is :
-GMm/Rs , but schwarzschild radius Rs  is , Rs= 2GM/c^2 , potential energy= -  (0.5 )mc^2 , but in fact the energy is double the potential energy , because we have two cases , whether M is fixed and m moves toward it , or m is fixed and M moves toward , I know if one work is done the other one can not be done but I am talking about the capability  of a work to be done , we have two different capabilities for work to be done in different ways and stored energy is all about capability .
So the stored energy in m = 2(0.5)mc^2 = mc^2 which in fact is just what the mass contains of energy.
Now let's  fix mass m , Rs=2Gm/c^2 ,   energy=Mc^2 which is  energy in mass M.

[Alex Dullius Siqueira]

sorry for my English , I meant its hard for an electron moving towards a sodium-ion to obtain an accurate orbit again , its hard just like for a rock from space to obtain an accurate  orbit around earth .

 It lies on density/entropy of the substance...
 Different atoms are produced under different states on the same hf, once the "work" is done, or in a better sense "during" the process, any substance will experience a instability threshold, during the mix, one of both substances will be more favorable into gain electron, again entropy/hf...
  I'm not sure, but one needs to consider that energy is not a particle on itself, that the "particle configuration" on energy/quanta of something, is also in correlation with the environment...

  I mean the loss and gain of electrons does not simple, or only, lies on the atoms themselves, but on the environment/entropy the substance produces, diverging one from the other, releasing quanta from a chemical reaction, in other to produce a second substance, inevitable, when considering that electrons are configurations of the environment over the released energy, is expect that being both different substance with different properties, one of both should be more favorable to receive the electrons rather than the other, or the other to loose some, it's just a mater of perspective...
  One need to account for space at C, or photons at C, otherwise the electrons does not need to spin, for they do not exist in the first place...  A chemical reaction `visual effects` is only of our personal interest, it`s the medium that decides the equivalence in electron a determinate atom has, the atom alone can only pick between other atoms to bound itself, and when it does, is the environment again that will decide witch atom will loose or re-gain electrons...

 Please could you define, why the electron is a particle?
 Or why an atom to keep exiting requires electrons?

 Does not need to be a deeper explanation, only the mechanics form where they are for, energy of space or energy when on space...  I ask because if I understood it correctly all fields are the same, and everything else is "work done" and "work that can't be done", universe has than a limited amount of energy available and that is constantly being loss when a work is done...
 Just curious into know if your universe(space) is finite and does not posses a structure, in that case you would be relying everything on a static field, where everything inside depends and relies only the photon, the different proportion not as being scaled on size by time, but why the different sizes?

[Yahya (OP)]

if stored energy can cause electric field and electrons are charged particles , then electrons can be a kind of stored energy , we can think of electric current as a flow of continuous energy not photons and chemical reactions occur due to stored energy interactions , instead of a particle that have negative charge and can absorb energy , its stored energy that by itself cause charge and it itself is energy , they are continuous photons as a flow , an atom has mass as nucleus and stored energy around it as electrons. the existence of negative stored energy as charge make existence of positive stored energy in nucleus.
when rubbing amber , you transfer energy by rubbing,  to be stored as (electrons) in an atom  but that won't affect chemical properties because stored energy has levels of interaction, for example magnetism is stored energy , but does not affect say wood because they are in different levels , gravity affects all matter in a higher level.

[Yahya (OP)]

these  levels of interaction I mentioned above are missing in the current model , electrons can move from one object to another in electrostatic charging without affecting chemical properties , how that is possible?

[Alex Dullius Siqueira]

these  levels of interaction I mentioned above are missing in the current model , electrons can move from one object to another in electrostatic charging without affecting chemical properties , how that is possible?

 Perhaps a free moving electron is not treated as an electron at all, perhaps a second configuration of the moving "quanta" of that energy, spited to the smallest size, till one got another point of reference (atom), there the quanta should be able to reform back into an electron or positron depending on the requirements for balance... The charge could be related only with their spin and orbits, and not with the energy itself, only with the configuration the receive from "the environment/space" in function of the requirements of the new atom they move in... If no requirement for electron or proton is presented, no need for electron, but spectrum...

  I just suggesting that if a moving electron behaves or receives on that instant a photonic configuration, it would be free from stored mass, till it finds another point of reference to orbit, reshaping as an electron or proton, or keep as spectrum... Now if assume that the electron looses mass when it changes configuration, becoming spectrum, is to accept that the moving electron does affect the chemical properties, by messing with temperatures...
  What's the state of charge of a traveling photon?

[Yahya (OP)]

motion is the interchangeability between energy and matter , if an object with mass 1 k.g and kinetic energy 1 joule , this one joule will interchange with PART of the full energy in one kilogram causing motion , it does need to be consumed or to be taken from another source the exchange keep the same amount without loss  , that why an object can not move faster than light because its kinetic energy exceed the actual energy stored which is 0.5mc^2 , the interchangeability is between equal amount and have the same origin energy -matter , so energy contained in mass m equals 0.5 mc^2 and not mc^2 , classical kinetic energy equation 0.5mv^2 applies to all speeds , when an object moves by c speed its kinetic energy equals 0.5mc^2 which the same as its mass-energy , I predict that if an object moves at speed of light and its pushed by say a rocket mechanism  ,  it will heat up or emit rays  , and it won't move faster , in other words the energy can't exchange with matter . it has another form rather than being kinetic energy.
I made a mistake by saying stored energy inside matter causing gravity equals mc^2 by assuming we should double the possible potential energy :
" suppose we have two masses M and m , let mass M be fixed in space and let mass m be put in every possible position in space , the potential energy from infinity to schwarzschild  radius is :
-GMm/Rs , but schwarzschild radius Rs  is , Rs= 2GM/c^2 , potential energy= -  (0.5 )mc^2 "
however it should be just half the amount of mc^2 and it is the same as the energy stored in mass m.

[Yahya (OP)]

another process same to motion is light production ( I am not sure about this process because I still need to first define an atom more deeply ) the process is :
when there is heat or electric energy in matter an atom absorb energy and continues in absorbing until the energy exceed the amount 0.5mc^2 where m is the mass of an atom , when it exceeds this amount it is emitted as a photon , so a photon energy should be 0.5mc^2 where m is the mass of an atom , with a certain frequency. it is the same  as motion instead in motion atoms moves as a whole package towards a particular direction , heat will cause irregular motion in different directions .
it waits until the absorbed energy equals 0.5mc^2 , and emit all the energy as a quantum to absorb more energy and so on.

[Yahya (OP)]

I think that why light moves at speed c because it is a kinetic energy of 0.5mc^2 !!

[Yahya (OP)]

what if my hypotheses are valid ? how it would be acceptable worldwide ? will scientists accept a forum thread ?

[GoC]

what if my hypotheses are valid ? how it would be acceptable worldwide ? will scientists accept a forum thread ?

No.

I think that why light moves at speed c because it is a kinetic energy of 0.5mc^2 !!

You haven't described the reason for c as a constant. Main stream has the same problem. They claim light does not slow down than speed up going through different mediums. This is because there is no mechanism in their understanding. This is a limitation to understanding. c is fundamental energy outside of mass kinetic style energy. c moves electrons and allows motion up to c energy by photon spectrum but not mass. The logic of a photon slowing and speeding up going through different materials guaranties energy is outside of mass. Yet the standard model defends the idea of something for nothing. To change minds it takes a herculean effort similar to trying to convince the Pope God does not exist. Ideas on a forum falls on deaf ears.

99% of scientists will believe a 1% possibility to maintain the standard model. Science has become faith.

[Yahya (OP)]

the decrements in speed happens due to absorption process , light has the property to be absorbed by atoms , at the time its absorbed , it will be a combination of both matter(atom) and  energy (photon) , the speed of this combination will be less than c :
K.E = 0.5mv^2
kinetic energy is the energy of photon , m is the supposed mass the photon comes from, v=c, if there is mass the total mass will increase , but not the kinetic energy , in other words the mass will slow the photon , the mass itself needs energy, when mass increases while K.E is constant(photon energy) then v is decreased to be less than c.
photon energy differs from kinetic energy , photon behaves like mass and its energy can be absorbed by say solar panels , a mass will not increase due to increment in its kinetic energy, Einstein was wrong. its not that simple: if mass is energy and energy is mass then they are the same.the are equivalent but in not the same , energy being converted to mass and vice versa is not that simple.

[Yahya (OP)]

photon behaves both as mass and energy, as mass because its a quantum and  can move in vacuum without a medium and as energy because it can be absorbed in solar panels as electric energy.

[Alex Dullius Siqueira]

It's more likely the quanta of the photon is absorbed by the already existing electron on the panel, the infusion of energy on such electron would make it jump away from the atom on another band, ultimately the electron has to keep existing as an electron and the only option is to expel the plus back into the medium as spectrum, that for its turn will be able to both, infuse already existing electrons with their own quanta, or even if necessary to cumulative in order to form a necessary electron or proton, depending on the stability of the atom they are serving...

  I mean that the reality seems to be that electrons does not absolve that available quanta, but instead otherwise, where the constant attempt of the spinning quanta wants by any given instant to join with the electrons, sharing their own spin(mechanics of space) with the whole structure...
  I do not believe the quanta of the photon can be absorbed by the solar panel walls but instead that the collision of that quanta with the stable matter, is causing entropy gain and loss, over matter(silica) that has a lower threshold, that causes a lot of entropy on the environment...

 Se the reality behind my poor resolution?
  The truth seems to be, that for broke down completely one cannot improve relativity over corrections, one like Einstein, need to have a "happier tough of their life" and figure it out on a clear instant by guessing, and than do the math over it...
  We can't change already existing explanations for now different from back there, the alternative paths are parallel one with the other, you can't change relativity without explain quantum mechanics, and vice-versa...

 Einstein could figure it out, for he was able to visualize the mechanics, and foreseen the whole 4D picture of the universe he predicted in real time, a skill that hardly can be learned, and even if someone does there is still the necessity of good relationships and background...
  The only viable way humanity has to achieve this goal is to share all available information and improve their own calculations over someone else work...
 Even Einstein struggles with math, lucky he asked for help, and he only received it, for he had foreseen the correct frame, otherwise the math would have being abandoned on the first part...
 In reality, as many here, I believe that everytime someone record a unedited footage of a U.F.O. they are in fact recording the result of the private work of governments over censored data, I mean have you turn own the TV on 2016? Starting with chemtrails and many more lies, front hat point on is to imagine that relativity was figured out decades ago by some...

 If you can visualize a way to express you theory into a practical way that suggest evidence it would be questioned, and that's a good sign for any theory... Newton, Einstein and many other genius have already took over the visual proves, as measurements of the orbits, relativity, quantum mechanics... What we are missing is practical devices exercising functions that may sustain proofs for inconsistencies, or a complete happy tough over the universal mechanics and why...

 Take in consideration, we should not be this far, this is the sole reason behind our mind struggle to comprehend, we are only this far, for Einstein gave us a unnatural jump back there, and was only possible to achieve that by a combination of preparation and special trained mind... As if he was someone that relativity was intuitive to him, the only struggle he had was how to put in mathematical terms so we could understand...

[Yahya (OP)]

is there any evidence for relativity like a rotating object at high speed will increase its weight ? if not why it should be "faith" ?
its not just about math, many theories can be verified mathematically yet they  are not all valid.