~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Vergon: The logic is faulty. SCENARIO 1 If you pursue a beam of light, your velocity has to be relative to the emitter. As you gain in velocity the frequency reduces. At c it is zero. No "spatial oscillation". Also, at c, the energy of the photon is zero -- and the momentum is zero. Zero, zero, zero = there is nothing to observe. But how can that be? The photon must have consisted of something. The only conclusion is that what you behold are a static electric and static magnetic field. They are at rest to you and have no kinetic energy, momentum or frequency but they do have mass. There is a problem, however. In a static condition only one field is present. It takes motion to produce the other field. So the question is - in the present scenario, which field will be in evidence? SCENARIO 2 There is a problem with the posit: The speed of light is c to all frames. Dear Einstein, you state you pursue a beam of light. You forgot that the beam of light will always precede you at c -- thus you can never attain a velocity equal to the photon. You can, however, attain a velocity equal to the photon's velocity at the start of your pursuit. i.e., c. So even as the frequency goes to zero (and the energy and momentum too) the beam is passing you at c. Does that mean at the observer's velocity c (relative to the emitter) the velocity of the photon is 2c relative to the emitter? I don't think so.