Commentaries to Einstein's Explanation of Photoelectric Effect

(Yeah i know it should have been called photon-electron effect, this way it wouldn't have been confounded by so many with some photography related thing).

Photoelectric effect is one of the basis of Einstein's theory (of relativity of course). The experiments done before him showed that an electron is knocked out of bondage if hit with radiation above certain frequency, no matter the intensity of the beam, a more intense (classic, continuous) beam meaning higher energy making no difference.

Though this does not necessarily leads to it he came with the idea that radiation is made of discrete packets of (transversal, vibrating) energy he then considered as particles, later called photons. He even threw a formula including frequency and Plank's constant (don't know how to type scientific formulas with Greek letters right now, was not prepared for all these that for me would have been forgotten forever if not for this).

Einstein's photons do not have a resting mass since the emitters in a vacuum tube do not loose mass by emitting photons, which also means they only exist when in motion but they break the conservation of mass principle.

If they have a mass when in motion they should also have a longitudinal momentum and a kinetic energy, other than the transversal vibration energy that depends on the frequency (wavelength) as shown in the experiments.

Photons' longitudinal kinetic momenta is real by some and included in the design of hypothetical devices such as solar sails. Some say lasers create a weak but measurable momentum, being pushed in the other direction of emitting light. However the different opinions i collect are contradictory as this phrase is.

When a hypothetical photon hits an atom and adds enough energy to an electron and the electron breaks free and some, it then disappears (he said is absorbed). The theory does not explain what happens to its longitudinal, non vibrating kinetic mass momentum.

Also the vibrating energy of a photon would not have any sense without a mass. However it is not explained in the theory how the photon vibrates to carry that energy. Since it has no electric charge, it cannot vibrate in an accompanying variable transversal electric field. It could only be gravitational, maybe against self in time. Asymmetric and spinning?

Even though we cannot calculate its longitudinal kinetic energy by Einstein's relativistic formula of kinetic energy, where the resting mass or non relativistic mass of a particle is used since photons do not have a resting mass, we could at least calculate its longitudinal kinetic energy by the classic formula E=mv2/2 with v the the speed of light. Researchers at Stanford in order to calculate the mass of a photon equated the kinetic energy as calculated above with the relativistic energy of a photon E=hf, where h is Plank's constant and f frequency.

I believe i see where it's going... The (in)famous equation E=mc2 may derive from here, if you arbitrarily equate the two types of energy and then add them. It looks like the most famous equation in the whole theory of relativity that stipulates energy is mass comes from a non relativistic calculation that factors in the square of the speed of light of a photon with no resting mass and photon's relativistic mass.

As stated above longitudinal kinetic and transversal vibration energy are equal. Which probably makes for the dualism particle-wave and tries to keep them both equitably satisfied.

However there are some bad news. The spherical waves (pumpkin whatever) as we know them loose energy with the square of distance and "EM" waves as we know them are no exception. And still... A single photon emitted by a decaying electron will never extinguish if it doesn't hit anything in its travel (with the speed of light across the Universe)...

Even in the relativist world there are other ways to better explain the mass defect and one of them is same electrons moving at different relativist speeds before and after...