One purpose in this is to apply a kind of understanding of a property to EMR in its free independent state.

The properties we understand today have been produced from physical interactions with Energy in order to get some understandings of it. However, as we have learned, as you interact with Energy it produces some remarkable results. These are things such as wave-particle duality and a constant velocity.

(What we know less about, as far as I understand, is how to describe energy when it has not interacted, or is not interacting with anything.

What I intend to do is exactly that. Which is, apply a property to energy in its un-disturbed state. At least in a theorectical manner with mathematical support.

So we begin with comprehending bodies of mass interacting together.

Without getting back into the examples I will just state the following:

Bringing an object to a stop requires the same amount of work as turning an object 90 degrees from its course of trajectory.

In the case of the object being brought to a halt the momentum is conserved and transfered in the direction of trajectory to the object doing the blocking. (with some exceptions)

In the case of the object being redirected 90 degrees, the momentum is conserved and remains with the original moving object.

In these scenarios the object that is doing the blocking experiences the same net forces in either case. (assuming time, t is equal).

To add to this. If the blocker object attempted to redirect the moving object in the opposite direction. That is, to stop the object and send it off from which it came the circumstance is not the same.

It is only the square relationship that shares these equalities.

So far quite simple right?

Now, if we take this knowledge and apply it to Energy (EMR) is there anything we can learn?

Energy (ie massless photon) for starters contains no mass. Also, Energy can neither be created or destroyed.

With physics we continually see a give and take relationship of conservation. For example, if you give an object velocity it gains kinetic energy.

So if we remove the quality of 'mass' from a particle one would expect this to create an exchange, such as applying some kind of new attribute to the particle.

My question is what would this new attribute be?

A massless particle can not be contemplated to interact with other massless particles in a physical way, because mass is the key to having physical interaction.

My assertion is that a massless particle would be required to take on the square relationship of mass to its own particular characteristic.

One way to imagine this is to consider that this object always moves two directions at the same time two perpendicular directions. This is because, if we consider what the source of squaring is all about it is the perpendicular juxt opposing directions.

So if we were to imagine a massless particle, we must imagine a kind of duality be applied to that particle.

If the particle is moving north for example, I assume to say it also moves East or West, or East and West. For each incriment this object moves north it spreads out to a larger area east and west and thus its total quantity is spread over a larger area. Basic practical physics would suggest it to be less energetic on a given consistent area as it grows in volume(or area) when taking a measurement.

By the above I mean to relate to pressure and pounds per square inch. So, a small object and a large object of equal mass apply a different value of force and energy to a given and equal target.)

What I personally find remarkable is that light (energy) behaves very similar to this assertion I bring forth here.

I am afraid I need a refresh course on the [math]latex[/math] commands to show more work.

Hopefully this clarifies any confusion and likewise adds none..