Photons of light are not bent by gravity



    "Next the better the last part
    if no anger's in your heart"


    Do you know your photons?

    New interpretation of star-light and space bending experiment of 1919. Einstein assumption about gravitation is not only defective, it is wrong

    Newton's characterization of light remains good and relevant. New definition of a photon brings up old and some new attributes of light. Yes, this includes multipath

This article challenges the experimental "proof" that gravitation curves or bends light or light's path. Also, the case is made that the premise of 'gravitation-is-the-same-as-acceleration' is simplistic and without merit.

But of course, light is pure energy and its path is straight.

      If you came here looking for ways to bend light's path in everyday space and without a lens, we've got a suggestion on that on our page dealing with light's other properties. Yes, it can be done.

Throughout the popular and professional literature, Einstein's general theory of relativity stands out as one of the singular achievements of the 20th Century. This theory, for example, leads some to believe in the existence of black holes.

The legacy

In 1919, the tenet of the general theory of relativity was thought to have been confirmed by an experiment: Light from a distant star changed its path ("bent") when it passed close to the body of our sun. The inference from this experiment, however, is incorrect because what was actually observed is an optical phenomenon.

Flawed logic

Light traverses spatial distance with parameters that can be readily measured. Space gives no preference to the components of light and all of light's energies, i.e. colors, travel at the same speed. When light travels through mass or matter such as through glass, water, air of the atmosphere, or the sun's corona, light of different colors propagate at different speeds and that is how the rainbow or the crimson evening sky comes about. Light's path will not bend because it is in proximity of a massive body. The bending of light is through the optical interaction with matter comprising the sun's corona -- that is, refraction. The bending-of-light phenomenon may be called 'gravitational bending' or lensing but all such bending is detected only for light that grazes suns or galaxies and the bending is of optical nature. There are no observations of light's bending that would happen without the bright star doing the bending -- that is, bending due to a gassless mass object is not observed.

Bending of light, if any, is due to corona. That is, due to interaction with matter. Includes electrons!


In the general theory of relativity, it is self evident that inside an accelerating object, say a room, light enters through the window but strikes the opposite wall of the room below the geometrically straight line because the room is accelerating upward and light travels at finite speed. There is no contention that all frequencies of light trace the same subjectively curving path inside the accelerating room. Einstein, however, postulated that acceleration is gravity. The 1919 scientific experiment was set up to corroborate that "If a light's path bends as a result of acceleration, then light's path will bend as a result of gravity." The bending of the light's path, however, is due to light's interaction with corona. Consequently, bending of light (or light's path) by gravity needs to establish the corona bending component and the presumed gravity bending component. Gravity-caused bending of light, if present, would not be a function of light's frequency (light's energy) but the coronal aspect of refraction certainly is.

Acceleration is not gravity

To resolve dissimilar interpretations of the observed bending of the light's path, the following -- and just as scientific -- experiment would address that: Duplicate the original experiment and additionally record the spectral data of the observed distant star. If the bending effect is optical, we will record a spectral spread akin to the prism effect. If the effect is gravitational, the rainbow or the prism effect would not exist. A broadband source from a star contains many frequencies and the rainbow color separation could then be measured.

Can be confirmed. Need broadband source to determine corona effects

Gravitation results in several things and at times it is acceleration, but acceleration is not gravitation. Even if all fish are swimmers, the act of swimming does not make you a fish. (All fish are swimmers. Aristotle is a swimmer. Therefore, ..) In essence, once the cause and effect are differentiated they cannot be reversed and cannot be equated. Once it is established that a thunder is caused by a lightning in the air, the cause and the effect cannot be reversed. It is then not possible to say that thunder causes lightning or that thunder is the same thing as lightning.

In the absence of a degree of freedom, gravitation continues to exist and becomes weight -- but without any acceleration. Weight is the effect of gravitation and weight (or pressure) cannot cause gravitation. Gravitation causes weight.

In the presence of a degree of freedom, the object begins to accelerate. Gravitation causes acceleration and not the other way around. The equivalence of acceleration and gravitation logic is for simpletons, for if we were to apply it to an accelerating bullet then one could claim that the explosion created gravitation.

Acceleration due to gravitation happens when a body has a degree of freedom but gravitation does not in general show itself (does not manifest) as acceleration. A cup on the table is subject to gravitation and has weight but does not accelerate. The basic premise of general relativity that 'acceleration is gravitation' is flawed to the core.

An attribute may be a component of an object but in general the attribute does not make the object


    Here is one somewhat technical paper from India that also claims the light bending around a star is optical in nature.

    A prism bends light and in such case the photons interact directly with the medium that is glass. In this DSSP topic we show how light bends through a moving prism.


In 1975, an experiment was performed – at Harvard, no less – that attempted to differentiate between two components that may bend light (or bend light's path).

    1) Corona, and
    2) Light-bending gravitation theory

The experiment used a pulsar instead of a (distant) star serving as the source of light. Because the pulsar emits at a very narrow frequency, the effects of the corona would be applicable to but one frequency. This is most unfortunate because the rainbow effect could not be established even if it did exist, for but one frequency is available from a pulsar. Most inappropriately, however, the bending coefficient due to corona was plugged in and, therefore, the bending effect due to corona was assumed and not measured. Moreover, no corona dynamics were considered. A repeat of this experiment will yield a different result because corona density is likely to change dramatically but the coefficient and the equation that calculates the presumed coronal effects do not change. You could guess and you would be right if you say that but one measurement was made (or published) by Harvard. If the corona-bending coefficients were picked differently, then this very experiment could claim that gravity does not bend space at all and all effects are due to corona.

Fundamentally, one needs a single broadband source such as the star – not a narrow-band pulsar source this experiment used – and thus directly measure the multi-frequency prismatic effect due to corona. [Tough to say if Harvard is technically and intellectually weak because they put the theory ahead of the proof -- or if this experiment is but one of their pseudoscientific exercises in bending and confining public opinion. The follow-on consideration is whether Harvard's weakness extends to their other faculties.]

Harvard sucks up to black holes


    On the cosmic scale, the prevailing moving energy storage is in the form of the angular momentum. Quantum mechanically, the creation of rotation-counterrotation is easy to see and understand. However, the light-bending or space-bending theories cannot get things spinning and happily ignore 99% of the entire cosmic moving energy. In the case of the existing counterrotating galaxies the nonlocal quantum mechanical momentum creation explains it just fine.

 Five pointed star in Opening The HyperTunnel

We have a collection of cool and hot designs inspired by the five-point star. This particular design is about opening a Hyperflight path, a tunnel - yes, for traveling to the stars. View select designs -- or visit our store at Zazzle (.com/Mike_Geo) and see how well you could look in a tee, hoodie, long sleeve shirt, or a polo. All our designs come from nature and center on the golden proportion.

Other challenges to light being bent by gravitation include the critique of Eddington's observational methods, for Eddington's methods may have been politically motivated. There are, fortunately, simpler ways of confirming light's straight path, particularly because neither NASA or Harvard University can execute the starlight bending experiment without prejudice. Both light and gravitation are virtual waves both are wavefunctions and the proof is simpler when, for example, a beam of laser light is found to be unable to move a mirror at reflection, for light carries no inertia. This site has several articles about light. Moving prism effects are included, as well as the experiment that would directly measure light's pressure if it exists. (Quantum Pythagoreans book details the light-bending mechanics of a prism and explains why higher energy photons bend more.)

General relativity is built from simplistic notions, and equating acceleration with gravitation does not hold in applications. A person at the equator is subject to radial acceleration but his weight does not increase. A person at the pole is not accelerating in any way but such person is subject to gravitation nonetheless. A satellite in a polar orbit does not experience a change in gravitation as a function of its geodesic position and no matter how much its path bends.

New definition of a photon

In a way of an introduction, a few words about the two basic interactions a photon may have with matter. You want to differentiate between the absorbing (reducing) and the virtual (nonreducing) interaction of light. These two kinds of interactions remain poorly understood in science books regarding the mechanics. While mainstream science thinks of light's duality as 'particle' vs 'wave,' such is not our duality. Light cannot impart pressure at a mirror surface, for light's reflection is a nonreducing interaction. [There is one clown named Feynman who made light's reflection into an absorption-radiation event. This guy -- along with his entourage of proffes sores --  ignore that the delay thus introduced would cause lightspeed measurements to vary as the number of reflections increases -- which is not the case.] 

    Absorbing -- that is, reducing, interactions present many challenges and also opportunities if you want to go beyond heat generation, for a photonic reduction is about energy transformation.

    Regarding nonreducing interactions, a phenomena of well-known reflection and refraction come up but no inertia (pressure, recoil) manifests. The thing to watch for during refraction -- when photons of light change their path going through a prism -- is that the greater-energy photon bends more than a lower-energy photon. This makes it difficult to model photons classically as "little mass particles with a bit of momentum" and actually discredits anyone who fails to notice it by omission or commission. Also, each photon acts independently of all other photons. Of course, photons of light can never be treated as billiard balls (except by people who mustn't follow the path of light's virtual existence) and calling the light 'corpuscular' -- to differentiate it from mass or materia -- made sense to Newton then and is relevant today. Newton never said light is made of particles but many scientists can be found putting words like 'tiny particles' in Newton's mouth.

    Another wonderful example of scientists' gutlessness is the parameter of lightspeed. While commonly accepted -- and I agree -- that light's speed is always constant to all observers, scientists cannot summon up the courage to call lightspeed absolute. But that is exactly what lightspeed is.

    Good start on light's behavior, including the light mill and its motion reversal, is with the Stump Your Teacher page.

    Geometry alone provides clean differentiation between what is straight and what is curved. Light beam's path, then, can be enforced to be straight or curving via the squaring of the circle topic.

    Getting rid of ether is a great example of reductionism. Throw ether out and you simplify things -- except that your conclusion are now wrong and you drag your math tools into irrelevance as well.


    Newton's Photon. Newton worked with mass in depth and formally defined the property of inertia, which is the dynamic characteristic of mass (materia). Newton spoke of materia often and in connection with density, forces and movement. Newton, however, did not endow light with the same terminology. Corpus or corpuscular then and now is not limited to a physical entity but can also be a logical or intellectual embodiment such as a body of work, a body of knowledge, or a body of belief. Newton's 'corpuscular' parameter gives light the representation of closure, completeness and cohesiveness. In the last (20th) century the entity of light received an additional characterization: nonlocal. Although 'nonlocal' is for some not a very descriptive term, 'nonlocal' should answer questions such as, "is light zero when it crosses the zero axis?" The answer is no because a photon is a wave and needs to be treated as a whole (a photon does not exist in one spot).

    Mike I. definition of a photon {2010}
    The photon of light is a fixed quantum of energy that always exists within finite and contiguous volume of space. Photon's energy always remains constant regardless of 1) interactions that may speed up or slow down the photon's propagation through different media, or 2) interactions that may change photon's path by reflection, refraction, or multipath. (Multipath happens with a half-silvered mirror, dual/multi slits, or with bifringent crystals.) Photon's volume is always contiguous regardless of interactions such as with the electron, slit geometries, a prism, or a half-silvered mirror. (This means a photon cannot be physically cut into pieces.) Photon's (light's) energy can change qualitatively only through transformation that is, absorption, and then only as a whole. (This means that a part of a photon's energy cannot be realized.) While photonic (self)superposition is infinite, a photon's contiguous volume is unbounded (infinite having priority advanced). Photon's energy is the virtual energy. (All wavefunctions are virtual entities.) A photon's interaction with the gravitational wavefunction cannot and does not change light's path (both are even wavefunctions). A photon has no charge and, unlike a free electron, a photon does not have the innate propensity to spread.

    You also want to figure out the mechanism that actually creates a photon. If we accept a photon's creation as issuing from an atomic orbital (or nucleon) jumps then we have photons as transverse electromagnetic waves -- think Dirichlet. Here, photons exist because we see them -- but if we do not absorb (collapse) some of them then we cannot "see" or "feel" or "perceive" them. Moreover, there is also energy propagating longitudinally that is created via specific man-made geometries and here we encounter photonic energies having very different properties -- think Tesla.

    The fact that a photon cannot put pressure on a mirror at reflection can launch more ships than Cleopatra's face. For one, a laser has no recoil.

    Photon's undulations may change via geometric structures but its energy does not. See photon stretching

    A photon can also branch and propagate in multitude of paths while remaining whole. Perhaps the best example is the photon's double splitting and superposition experiment.

    Newton is most unusual in that he combined and integrated his theory with mathematical modeling and topped it off with an experiment. In his writings, Newton is careful to put only facts and factual conclusions in a body of the text. Newton's priority for experimental confirmation is expressed in his "I frame no hypothesis" ("Hypothesis non fingo" in Latin) statement from his Principia, which today could be better understood as 'I do not pretend to have a hypothesis' or 'I do not engage in speculations.' The word 'frame' has several meanings, and include 'make up' and 'pretend.' Newton's original quote in Latin was in connection with not being able to understand the cause of gravitation. Yet, Newton is not completely pedantic and puts additional, not-so-firm ideas as numbered thoughts (queries) at the end of the book, which were to be the discussion or follow-on points. In his prolific and now largely public correspondence, he can be found explorative and possibly yielding. There also are Newton's private writings that can be easily labeled speculative, and perhaps weird and strange -- in short, alchemical. Many writers quote Newton in support of this or that, or attempting to show Newton to be wrong -- but very, very few quote the source of their "Newton said" statements. Applying statements from Newton's main texts, Newton holds surprisingly well and even anticipates quantum mechanics through his conclusions about light. 'Corpuscular' term is Newton's summation of light's properties after his theoretical and experimental work, which is in Optics main body text. In one of his letter correspondences Newton writes: "Light is it self a heterogeneous mixture of individually refrangible rays," which goes to the heart of the individual and self-contained characteristics in what we now recognize as the photon.

    Newton's insistence on separating the true motion caused by the application of energy from the apparent motion caused by the movement of a frame of reference testifies to his very basic appreciation of the conservation of energy. This is very clearly stated in his Principia. The fact that the frame of reference is not arbitrary during the dual slit experiment is another indication that his absolute space postulate is sound ever since he made his assertion and could be used in QM. Today, 'absolute space' would be called 'absolute spatial distance' or, in the first math derivative, the 'absolute spatial velocity.' Fundamentally, absolute space means that absolute rest can be had and the dual slit experiment in our QM Primer addresses that.

    Creating a photon is easy but there are significant implications concerning the so-called relative motion. Any moving charge creates a photon. If you-the-observer move and the charge does not move, no photon is created. It is then quite apparent that relative motion is meritless. Insisting that the 'absolute reference is impossible' is but one of many flaws that entered physics via reductions. Yet the simple 'charge' vs 'observer' motion is conclusive as to the existence of absolute reference and absolute motion. There is more to this than just a 'who is right' argument. The reduction allows pseudoscience to receive "objective" funding from the government. While it is obvious that relative motion explains very little and that the real benefits are in the pursuit of the absolute reference, the government-funded teams -- as if they knew they have nothing but reductionist trivia -- attack others with government money in an attempt to protect the now-established dogma.

    If you need further explanation that the motion of a charge needs to be absolute in order to create a photon (and that such photon's energy is commensurate with the energy you put in when speeding up the charge), you'll be better off if you memorize all the mainstream science stuff about relativity and become a trivia buff.

Besides taking sides on who is right, is there more meat on this? By being unable to distinguish between what is straight and what curves, the present day scientist is in a form of a pathological mind warp. A scientist does not even differentiate between space-bending and path-bending. For the rest of us, the straight topology of Euclid and the curving topology of Riemann exist side by side and either one can be enforced. Yet, each person working this area needs to figure it out because it is not a question of belief but, rather, understanding [yes, that means there is a kind of a test].

Pursuing gravitation along its quantum mechanical foundation, the next topic to consider would be systems that create time. For example, time always issues from organized systems or processes, and time cannot attain its own independent existence. Presently, time is derived mostly from decaying and unstable matter but that is but one and inferior at that way of looking at time. There is a path on time for better understanding of time.


 Book by Mike Ivsin
 To Publisher...

The fact that light cannot impart pressure at reflection leads to many new applications of light. Presently, there may be a coverup, a deception, or pure misunderstanding -- but new opportunities make them all into a footnote of history. Could you sculpt light? In Quantum Pythagoreans, geometric constructs are introduced that, in addition to multipath, sculpt light in 1, 2, or 3D. Such dimensional constructs let you create new things.

In Quantum Pythagoreans, light is a wavefunction. The energy of light is virtual until light is absorbed.

The properties of light and that of the virtual electron are systemically explored and the role of light in atomic energy balance is brought to the surface. The book details the interaction between light and the electron that leads to the explanation of refraction and the prism effect, among others. The key is in discovering those properties that have priority during interaction and consequently prevail in the interaction. The superposition of light is instantaneous and this gives light yet another cluster of opportunities.

Continue ..

Go or select another topic from the gold post
HyperFlight home Portal in new window

©1998 -- 2011, 2013 Backbone Consultants. Copyrights Information
Last update June 5, 2013