[MaeveChondrally (OP)]

E=m*c^2 and E=hf , Einsteins formula nad Planks formula for the energy of a photon give m=hf/c^2 so photons have an equivalent mass and it is quantum mechanical duality , light is both mass and energy.  E=m*c^2 so mass is equivalent to energy and it is usually a different phase.  light is pure energy and has an equivalent mass.  if suns shine for 10 billion years that is a heck of a lot of mass out in space if you consider all the galaxies and all the photons emitted over all time in the past..  This could account for all the extra mass that does have gravity.  light does have momentum and if you look at the photoelectric effect photons being absorbed by a solar panel exchange momentum and there is a measurable force and displacement that can be measured on the panel.  light has equivalent mass and has self gravity.  it is very small for most photons but not for the amount  of photons over 10 billion years for an entire galaxy.  i'm sure it is quite a considerable amount of mass and gravity.  similarly a black hole does attract and absorb light or consume it and light if it had no gravity it would not be attracted to black holes this implies it has mass or the equivalent of it.  light probably attracts mass and is attracted to it and it would be a modification of general relativity and it would be quantum gravity.  i see the way forward as one of stopping nonsensical dark matter and dark energy research and start mapping the light spectrum and location in spacetime of energy and mass so that they can predict orbits of galaxies and that of their suns.  dark matter is light and dark energy is light.  most of it cannot be seen because it is not in the visible spectrum.  RADIO waves, microwaves, infra red, ultraviolet, T rays, x rays, gamma rays and cosmic rays.  the frequency of some of them is very high and it is quite a lot of mass out there.   i believe it has been a misunderstanding before.  it can actually be seen with special detectors on satellites with telescopes.  the chandra satellite has a telescope and xray cameral on it.  Its also Young's double slit experiment where if you have one slit and fire photons at it separately it creates a bullet pattern on a film on the other side of the slit.  if you have two slits and fire single photons at it then you get an interference pattern on the film with magnitudes commensurate with a probability distribution.  this is quantum mechanical duality where light is both a particle and a wave. And you have two eyes to see with that create a probability distribution imagnitude interference pattern in your visual cortex which creates depth vision and a mapping of spacetime into your cognition with memory.
Occams razor says that the simplest hypothesis that explains the observed phenomena is probably true.
Try a different approach to calculation.  calculate the amount of photons emitted from a star in a second from its spectrum and calculate m=hf/c^2  for each frequency in the spectrum and then multiply up to 10 billion years or the average age of suns and then multiply by 100 billion suns for a galaxy like the milky way.  suns acrete matter and hydrogen over millenia.  see how much mass that becomes for a single galaxy and then see if it adds up to the dark matter mass!
Apparently light is actually held back from getting here by self gravity and the other mass out there and that explains why the night sky is dark and explains olbers paradox.

I'm trying to find out from google scholar where the numbers 27% and 5% of the universes mass for dark matter and normal periodic table matter and light come from respectively.  I am finding it difficult to find out where those numbers are proved.  does anybody have a reference.  i found one good survey paper by Jean Einasto from 2013 in the journal of physics called darjk matter.  but proof of those numbers and the observations that made them possible and the analysis of the evidence seems to be missing from the field!
The gravitational lensing paper data has to be reanalyzed in the light of quantum gravity and m=h/(lambda*c) for the mass of the photon.  This will change the gravitational lensing result by quite a  bit and the estimates of dark matter in the galaxies.  Remember back in 1933 the Zwicky Mount Wilson data was only for visible light and black holes could not be seen back than.

Astronaut/Commander Chris Hadfield's experiment on detecting dark matter failed on the international space station on his last mission!
The voyager space probe is far out in space and is probably a little off trajectory.  The retro rocket fuel necessary to correct the trajectrory is a bit too expensive to use.  perhaps if dark matter existed,  the voyager would be further off trajectory than it is.... this should be checked.

The Laser Interferometry Gravitational Observatory (LIGO ) gravitational lensing papers should be revisited in light of quantum gravity.
2 new uncertainty principles arrive due to f= 2pic^2m/h
they are for the photon travellling in time t,    delta t * delta m >= h^2/4/pi^2/c^2     and delta t * delta E >= h^2/4/pi^2

and these both come from the signal processing uncertainty principle   delta t * delta f >= h/2/pi
many thanks to Ed Jernigan and Mike Fich and Paul Wesson of the Royal Society and University of Waterloo
Paual actually got his PhD at Cambridge and is a good sci fi author.  Ed got his PhD at MIT and Mike got his at Berkeley
Many thanks to ken fleming too of Oxford who is a prof in the medical faculty
and thanks to Graham Wright of UT iin the department of medical biiphysics an MRI prof who got his degrees at Stanford and Waterloo
and Claude Nahmias of McMaster(Retired) who was in the dpartment of Nuclear Medicine and Invented Positron Emission Tomography
I'd like to thank Polkinghorn for his beautiful little book quantum world who worked with Feynman and is a CofE church minister who worked with Feynman back in the day and of course Feynman for all his work on path integrals.
i'd also like to thank Kolmogorov for all his work on Real Analysis and his work on turbulence and nonlinear systems.
I'd like to ppothumously thank my brother Peter Belshaw who got his PhD from Harvard in organic chemistry for teaching me cehmistry and his many discussions about astrophysics.
and Kathy Bowman for unflagging support and friendship for teaching me algebra and relations and functions .and Mrs Kewley the scottish math teacher for teaching me calculus.and the histrory of math and getting me interested in Newton and Archimedes the inventor of integral calculus.and mrs kogan getting me interested in the wave equation, youngs double slit experiment and kepler and tycho brahe. and mr kee for chemistry education and thermodynamics including entropy and enthalpy.
And i'd like to thank Neil Degrassi Tyson and especially Carl Sagan.

a spacetimefrequency distance is probably E/c^2*ds^2 = E/c^2(dx^2 +dy^2 + dz^2) - hf*dt^2 and this is also spacetime distance and the uncertainty principles apply and it is only valid for photons. or hf/c^2*dv^2=m(dvx^2 + dvy^2 + dvz^2) -E where vx is the speed in x direction. I believe there is some energy data and some frequency data and this should be used to check the result. it does reduce to the normal 4D Einstein spacetime ds^2 =. dx^2 + dy^2+dz^2 - c^2*dt^2 when we divide by hf/c^2. f dt^2 reminds me of a chirp in signal processing.
spacetimeEnergy is quantized and energy levels and frequency are quantized and photon is a wavepacket.
Mds^2 = M(dx^ 2+ dy^2 + dz^2) - Mc^2*dt^2 and this is mass spacetime and this is valid throughout the universe.
or
E/c^2 = E/c^2*(dx^2 + dy^2 + dz^2) - E*dt^2 and this is energy space time
basically for macroscopic phenomena these last two equations reduce to 4D and give the normal Einstein spacetime.
for light,   quantum gravity affects the path of light and also affects fusion research and nuclear research. i believe that their might be discrepancies. between the frequency and Energy data and this equation would highlight the errors if any.
 and affects the age and mass calculations for the universe.
also temperature in the desert affects the index of refraction in the atmosphere and changes the path of light based on the phenomena of mirages.  so the temperature causes the path of light to change aswell.
i believe that the feynman path integral of least action needs to be modified for the path of light by quntum gravity (mass of photon).
and maxwells equations are not quite right because they do not take into account phase of light and the mass and gravity of light.
Without energy, mass and light distributions known the path of light in the universe cannot be predicted.  i would say the index of refraction is important too.  this amounts to a 5D theory of spacetime and matter.  the distributions of light energy and mass need to be measured with light. and quantum gravity affects all these measurements.
with temperature and electromagnetism and the weak and strong nuclear forces and  entropy/negative entropy this amounts to a 10D theory and admits the possibility of conscious life.
Indeed if matter is conscious , alive and intelligent then light might take the path of most negative entropy.
we also need to mention information, knowledge and DNA.


by the way i cannot respond with replies to posts because of junior member status and the interface here.  i can only respond with thanks , or best answer.

also if dark matter did exist and the PhD saying that light passes right through it without affecting it is laughable , because the dark matter would have to be homogenously distributed and that would be impossible if it had mass because it would have gravity and it would clump and spiral.  it would form planets and asteroids.  it doesn't. also if it had mass and gravity and existed than it would affect the path of light and bend light if it that much mass.  it doesn't affect light, which has gravity and i believe it has mass too. because of the phtoelectric effect and Planck and Einstein.  so it cannot exist or it has no mass which defeats the purpose.  I still believe the mass of the universe has not been calculated accurately or correctly.   dark matter also has not been detected at CERN in the cloud chambers of the high energy linear collider.  so it is unlikely that such particles exist.  if they were too massive to be dtected at CERN than a linear collider would have to be the size of the solar system to possibly detect them. and that won't happen probably for a thousand years or 10000 years.  iat the current time occams razer should be employed and the simplest explanation that might account for olbers paradox, the path of light is that light phtons have relativistic mass, however small, and that a calculational error, due to incorrect formulation of the equations,  is probably most likely.

thankyou for the post that was about the amount of energy or matter converted to energy every second in the sun
4 x10^6ttons/second*10^3kg/tom*3600 seconds/hour*24hours/day*365days/year*10*10^9 yeears/sun*100*10^9suns=

1.26*10^38 kg in the milky way approximately there is also all the mass of the suns and the solar wind and the neutrinos  and black holes.
and after 10  billion years, our sun becomes a red giant.
i still think the light distribution of the sun should be checked and computed in this calculation as there may be many more reactions on the sun that are not fusion and the sun probably accretes matter over time.

the post about the iron ball and fusion was probably an oblique refernce to my period and may have been mysogenous
27th element being iron or Fe=fee=fillle=girl and it was hard to squirm out of. The Russians invented the periodic table and no wonder it hurts the period.  he probably doesn't know that in climate change research,  27% of the emissions problem is from electric fossil fuel power plants globally.  curious this is also the magic 27% hmmm and we have found a solution for it,  capture the CO2 and turn it into diesel with the Fisher Tropsch process.
27% is probably or nearly the number of  people that followed Hitler blindly in WWII.  its probalby the number of people in the population that can be hypnotized. it is also the number of people thay need to win a general election.
it is also the age of the biological clock in women when the majority of them decide to get married and pop out sprogs

[Origin]

light is both mass and energy.

Light has no rest mass.

light is pure energy

No, light is photons and photons carry energy but are not energy.

if suns shine for 10 billion years that is a heck of a lot of mass out in space if you consider all the galaxies and all the photons emitted over all time in the past.  This could account for all the extra mass that does have gravity.

Notice the c^2 term, it takes a heck of a lot of photons to equal the gravity from 1 kg of mass.

similarly a black hole does attract and absorb light or consume it and light if it had no gravity it would not be attracted to black holes this implies it has mass or the equivalent of it.

The reason that a photon goes into a black hole is due the curvature of space near a black hole.  A photon follows the null geodesic.

light probably attracts mass and is attracted to it and it would be a modification of general relativity and it would be quantum gravity.

That would not be quantum gravity.  General relativity already says that energy does have a gravitational attraction.

dark matter is light and dark energy is light.

That makes no sense.  Dark matter is present in very large amounts in galaxies.  There is more dark matter that normal matter in galaxies so clearly this dark matter cannot be photons.  Dark energy is the cause of the accelerating expansion of the universe, this cannot be caused by light.
I think you need to rework some of your ideas.

[Kryptid]

if suns shine for 10 billion years that is a heck of a lot of mass out in space if you consider all the galaxies and all the photons emitted over all time in the past..  This could account for all the extra mass that does have gravity. 

I did the math in your other thread which shows that this does not work.

[Origin]

calculate the amount of photons emitted from a star in a second from its spectrum and calculate m=hf/c^2  for each frequency in the spectrum and then multiply up to 10 billion years or the average age of suns and then multiply by 100 billion suns for a galaxy like the milky way.  suns acrete matter and hydrogen over millenia.  see how much mass that becomes for a single galaxy and then see if it adds up to the dark matter mass!

Very little mass loss of the sun is from the photons leaving it.  Much more mass is lost as the solar wind which is mostly electrons and protons.  At the end of the suns life a large percent of the outer layers of the sun will be thrown out into space.  the sun will then contract to a white dwarf at around 60% of its current mass.  The bottom line is the mass equivalent of the photons from the sun are small fraction of the mass that is either emitted or stays in the form of a white dwarf in the lifetime of a main sequence star.
The sun converts about 4 million metric tons of matter a second into energy.  So calculating it out we get:
metric tons.
The mass of the sun is about metric tons.
So about 1.19% of the suns mass will be converted to energy over the life of the sun... unless I made an arithmetic error.

[evan_au]

A very large proportion of the energy generated by hydrogen fusion in the core of the Sun is carried away by neutrinos, rather than photons.
- It is estimated that the photons we see emitted by the surface of the Sun today come from nuclear reactions that occurred 100,00 years ago (estimates vary somewhat)
- In contrast, Neutrinos that are passing the surface of the Sun now come from nuclear reactions that occurred 1 second ago.
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_neutrino

[Origin]

I noticed that @MaeveChondrally never actually responds to any questions or comments, in fact I don't see where he has responded at all to anyone.  Seems kind of pointless to read his posts in a discussion forum if he has no intention of discussing anything.  I hardly want to simply read a lecture about pseudoscience!

[Kryptid]

I noticed that @MaeveChondrally never actually responds to any questions or comments, in fact I don't see where he has responded at all to anyone.  Seems kind of pointless to read his posts in a discussion forum if he has no intention of discussing anything.  I hardly want to simply read a lecture about pseudoscience!

I'll keep an eye on that. "Keep it a discussion" is one of the rules, after all. If they keep up with post-and-runs, I'll issue a warning.

[Colin2B]

Certainly looks like a hit & run driver. Some of the previous topics have just been advertising for a book, which judging by the posts here really isn’t of any great interest.