Let's put it slightly different.

We have two possible effects.

1. If a photon would be shown to possess a mass.

Can it then be regarded as intrinsically timeless?

And what kind of Boson would it be then?

After all, we can 'make' them in a Bose Einstein condensate?

2. What are the actual proofs for it being intrinsically timeless?

I started to look for that but I can't seem to find them?

My own reasoning would possibly be, assuming that light propagates, that we need this as a definition for explaining how it conserves its energy, considering the 'distances' it covers, as well as the 'time' we notice it to have.

On the other hand. Without a clock, how can it propagate?

Not easily, if we assume distance needing a clock?

Also, it is often referred to it being a direct consequence of it being at 'c' but how do you prove that relationship? We talk about it as being a boson, and therefore having those properties, but I would still like to see the causality-chain clearer, leading to the conclusion.

You can say that as the equations prove that matter can't reach 'c' as the slope gets infinitely steep there is a clear difference between what we call bosons and fermions, but the idea of a photon possessing a mass would in my eyes degrade it from being 'time-less' if so?

So, anyone that can show me the proofs?

==

The clock on this server is slightly weird

It says ten minutes before my correction 'intrinsically' came to be

Hmm, it's relativistic