[talanum1 (OP)]

My theory has it that a tiny force keeps exerting it's influence on a Photon. Why doesn't the Photon keep accelerating?

Does F = ma apply, so that zero mass and finite force imply infinite acceleration?

[Kryptid]

My theory has it that a tiny force keeps exerting it's influence on a Photon. Why doesn't the Photon keep accelerating?

The fact that it doesn't keep accelerating would be strong evidence that your idea is wrong.

[talanum1 (OP)]

It needs a force to start moving. I can arrange it so that a moving photon has cancelling force on it, using negative events of spacetime.

[Kryptid]

It needs a force to start moving.

How do you know that?

[Janus]

It needs a force to start moving.

Nope. A photon is already moving at c upon its creation. 

Does F = ma apply, so that zero mass and finite force imply infinite acceleration?

a = F/m where m equals zero results in a  division by zero, which is undefined, not infinite.

This is not a problem for the photon as it never accelerates.

[evan_au]

My theory has it that a tiny force keeps exerting it's influence on a Photon. Why doesn't the Photon keep accelerating?

A Metaphor - Waves on a Pond
One of the enduring (and useful) metaphors for light is that of a wave - like a stone dropped in a pond has ripples spreading out.

The stone represents an initial input of energy.
- The waves/ripples carry that energy off "to infinity" (unless it runs into a bank, or reeds, etc).
- Nothing has to accelerate the ripples - they will keep a steady speed assuming that they are in a uniform medium (water of of constant density and depth, and constant gravity, etc).
- Nothing has to retard the ripples - they will keep a steady speed assuming that they are in a uniform medium
- The ripples do get lower in intensity as time goes by - the constant energy is spread over a larger and larger area.

Back to Light
Light (photons) has an initial input of energy, from an electron dropping from one shell to a lower one.
- The electromagnetic waves carry that energy off "to infinity" (unless it runs into a brick wall, a sheet of paper, etc).
- Nothing has to accelerate the waves - they will keep a steady speed assuming that they are in a uniform medium (usually a vacuum, but any medium of constant permittivity & permeability will also work).
- Nothing has to retard the waves - they will keep a steady speed assuming that they are in a uniform medium
- The waves do get lower in intensity as time goes by - the constant energy is spread over a larger and larger area.

all models are wrong, but some are useful

[talanum1 (OP)]

How do you know that?

I don't know, but it seems logical.

Nope. A photon is already moving at c upon its creation. 

Can you prove that - it seems illogical. We have E = pc and this requires a force: E is related to work (W = f ds). "They start out with a velocity" is equivalent to having infinite acceleration.

[Bored chemist]

Can you prove that

Yes.
The only possible speed for light is c.
You can calculate it from Maxwell's equations
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxwell%27s_equations#Vacuum_equations,_electromagnetic_waves_and_speed_of_light

Since it can't aheva speed other than c, it can't accelerate.

[talanum1 (OP)]

Maxwell's Equations does not provide a mechanism whereby the protophoton gains velocity to become a photon.

[Bored chemist]

protophoton

You need to prove that such an entity exists.

[talanum1 (OP)]

They must exist otherwise there is no mechanism for a photon to reach lightspeed.

Physically they exist if the fields are different from Maxwell's Equations close to the emitting surface. I have no equipment to test this.

[Janus]

They must exist otherwise there is no mechanism for a photon to reach lightspeed.

Physically they exist if the fields are different from Maxwell's Equations close to the emitting surface. I have no equipment to test this.

Just because you don't grasp how a photon can come into existence already moving at c doesn't mean that it doesn't happen.
"I don't understand it, so it must be wrong" is not a valid argument.

[talanum1 (OP)]

Then you must provide a mechanism whereby they start to exist at light speed. I can provide one.

[Bored chemist]

Then you must provide a mechanism whereby they start to exist at light speed. I can provide one.

Yes, but your idea doesn't work.

My theory has it that a tiny force keeps exerting it's influence on a Photon. Why doesn't the Photon keep accelerating?

The fact that it doesn't keep accelerating would be strong evidence that your idea is wrong.

Why bother to invent the "protophoton" to bolster a model that gives the wrong answer anyway?

[talanum1 (OP)]

I can change my model to give the correct answer.

[Bored chemist]

Why not just use the "old" model which already gives the right answer?

[Bobolink]

I can change my model to give the correct answer.

Quite easily since your "model" is essentially 2 sentences long.

[talanum1 (OP)]

Why not just use the "old" model which already gives the right answer?

The old model does not give a mechanism to accelerate photons to light speed.

Quite easily since your "model" is essentially 2 sentences long.

It is actually longer see attachments:
Physics from Axioms Advanced.pdf (64.69 kB - downloaded 429 times)
Physics from Axioms clean.pdf (124.44 kB - downloaded 552 times)

[Bored chemist]

The old model does not give a mechanism to accelerate photons to light speed.

Guess again.

[Bobolink]

The old model does not give a mechanism to accelerate photons to light speed.

Did you miss the post on Maxwell?

It is actually longer see attachments:

No thanks.  If you have more to say, then post it.