🚀 go-pugleaf

jimbo <Matta...@ans.com.au> wrote in article
<56v9se$e...@mippet.ci.com.au>...
> 
> >There is evidence in astrophotoghpy that when light from a far star
> >passes by a nearer star it appears to bend (similar to refraction)
> >causing the image to appear to shift position. This suggests that light
> >(a photon energy-particle?) does have mass and is effected by gravity.
> >So if "light" does have mass then how can light travel at the speed of
> >light?

Um, no. You've got yourself an erroneous syllogism there:

1)Gravity makes objects with mass move
2)The light is moving
3)Therefore the light has mass.

No. 

It doesn't have to have mass - the probem with the above argument is that
you're assuming that the _only_ way to make an object move is with gravity
- which only acts on mass.

Why does it need to have mass....? 

Massive objects warp space (see Einstein).  The light is travelling in a
straight line through warped space - and thus appears to 'bend'. 

(Suggestion: everybody on this thread take 10 minutes and reread your old
first year physics textbook.......the thread would vanish).
j