**Ask a monkey a physics question thread**

[MadMojoMonkey]

Just because you *observe* something to be in motion, doesn't mean it is in motion.

Careful.
Motion is relative, not absolute, yes. However, I've stipulated what the motion is relative to, an observer, any observer, under any observing conditions.

NO observer (whether that observer is an atom or a person or a microscope) ever observes a photon moving at any speed besides c.
That is the empirical datum.

The photon can be "at rest", while we move away from it.

A photon at rest in an inertial reference frame has never been observed.
Nothing is at rest with respect to (w.r.t.) us "while we move away from it." That's contradictory. If you're asserting it's at rest, you need to state w.r.t. what.

A photon can only be at rest in a reference frame which is comoving with it, which means that reference frame is moving at c, which is a non-inertial reference frame.

This is expansion... imagine a singularity of light, which then expands inwards at c.

I don't know what you mean by a singularity which expands inwards. A singularity is already an infinitely localized object, i.e. it exists at exactly one point.
That definition seems to make any "inward expansion" absurd, but ... black holes are weird, so maybe you're trying to make use of that?

Inside a black hole, the singularity is a location toward which all spacial directions point, and time is all weird-like. All we can say for certain is that an object inside a black hole's event horizon will never move away from the singularity. We cannot say that anything will reach the singularity in a finite amount of time.

So it's weird.

Well, anything caught in the slipstream of that newly created space (anything with mass) will see the light shoot away from them, but the opposite happened... the new space we presently occupy is getting further and further away from the light source.

I'm finding it hard to reconcile how light can traverse any space in that model.
If photons just sit still, and space expands around them, then how does light from the sun ever reach the Earth?

And for good measure, this can explain quantum entanglement... two entangled photons that *appear* a great distance apart actually occupy the same region of spacetime.

If 2 things appear (have been measured) to have distance between them in spacetime, then that is data.
A theory with is contradictory with the data is false.

Which is not to say that these particles may not occupy the same state in another field, but that's already beyond the conversation because we're talking about relative positions in spacetime.

This makes sense from the pov of the photon, since it experiences no time. So certainly from its pov, it's not moving. How can it be? Motion happens over time.

No matter how fast your reference frame is moving (or any other GR effects), you always observe your own time to be "normal." A photon isn't frozen in its own frame, everything BUT the photon is at frozen in time, due to infinite time dilation.