Time in the "reference frame" of the photon and aswell curved spac Hi there! I understand the tendancy of physicists to stick to the math, and the logic itself, and to often avoid attempting to conceptualize a process or law, but that's kinda the opposite of what I'd like to do here. I dont mind at all if you refer to the theory, math or logic, and id quite like that, but I am attempting here to conceptually comprehend the stuff. I am a little math freindly, and very concept, logic and word freindly. Here, I want to explore the implications of the math, in a thought experiment type manner, and I hope to understand, if, in this thought experiment, the conception valid for the proof/theory/math. According to what little understanding I have of special relativity, time dilution means that "time" (ie typical "change in the direction of entropy"), slows down as we near the speed of light, the potential implication being that at the exact speed of light, c, time is "fully diluted". Would it be valid to thus imagine time not existing for a photon, and perhaps all events occuring "simultaneously" for the photon, in its reference frame, according to the theory? Could we validly imagine light not experiencing change? Or is there some specific reason to think that a photon does "experience" time, while travelling at exactly c? (This may or may not have implications, it may or may not be testable, or valid, but on the surface it would seem to be an implication given a little thought). If indeed time does not exist for the photon, then could that imply that time does not exist at all, but only at "low speeds, or lower energy", much like potentially some of the feild forces like mass and magnetism? (Einstein does say that time is relative, and that motion is relative, but also implies that time-space is an objective, if flexable, absolute of sorts which seems slightly at odds) ...... The one other thing I have trouble with in SR, is gravity. If "spacetime" is curved, in the analogy of a warped surface, with a ball rolling down into a hole - the ball would not roll down into the hole if there was not still a force like gravity acting on this warped space. If you placed a ball in this warped space, there is no force acting on the ball to start it rolling. So it would seem to me, that curved spacetime does not actually explain gravity. Without still have a force, everything would be static unless some force acted on something. The only verified "proof" of curved spacetime that I am personally aware of is the curvature of light around a gravity well, but that could equally merely be gravity effecting the light, no? Or are there other experimental proofs, outside of the math? Can anyone give a conceptual version of this theory of gravity, that explains the causation of gravity, in a way that will make sense to anyone? Thanks so much for your help guys!