The "Outrageous Okona" Falsehood

[Kane Starkiller]

Kane Starkiller,

as I see it, you are not able to explain it because you don't really understand it.

You have learned - as I have learned - that in a closed system momentum is constant. If something is changing the mass or the velocity (velocity = speed + direction) of an object, momentum is transfered to that something that is changing the mass or the velocity.

But when light is flying through curved space - as it is always doing - it doesn't really experience a change in its momentum. Neither the speed nor the direction is really changed. The light has in the space in which it is the same direction with the same speed. In that curved space-time there happens nothing to the light.

How does it not change when the light changes it's heading? The heading of light is different than before it passed near a gravity field isn't it? So how isn't the momentum changed? Please show me the mathematical equations on how is it possible for momentum not to change and yet the heading of the light is different.


See this? The heading of light is changed while flying near the sun AND REMAINS CHANGED AFTER IT MOVES AWAY.
HEADING BEFORE ENCOUNTER!=HEADING AFTER ENCOUNTER
THEREFORE
MOMENTUM BEFORE ENCOUNTER!=MOMENTUM AFTER ENCOUNTER
Can you grasp this?

I have found an explanation in English on another side. Maybe that will help you more:

It has been observed that the gravitational fields of very massive objects (star sized) “bends” light rays which pass by it. The phenomenon, known as gravitational lensing has been recorded and verified. But what is going on here? Does this mean the light has mass to be attracted to gravity?

According to general relativity gravity is manifest as disturbances or warping of the topology (or geometry) of space-time. Bodies which can gravitate warp the space-time in their vicinity which changes the path of nearby objects through space-time.

Definitions: the path of an object through space-time is called a worldline, the worldline of a photon is called a geodesic. Ok, now here’s the crunch: light rays don’t actually bend in response to gravitation! The geodesic looks bent in three dimensions, but is actually a straight path through 4D. An analogy may help illustrate: imagine a plane flying overhead in three dimensions. Now suppose its image is directed onto a two dimensional irregular surface – lets say the plane’s shadow falls on some hilly ground. Now the plane may fly a straight path above in 3D while its 2D image appears to deviate all over the place! If you were constrained to the 2D surface you would perceive the plane’s path to curve. Everything follows naturally determined paths through space-time in this way, light does as well.

It's wonderfull how that description is exactly saying what I have said (or at least have tried to say) the whole time. The light does not really experience a change in its momentum. The path of the light only seems to be changed. But at the point, where the changing appears to happen - in the curved space-time, nothing really happens to the light.

Ah so the light doesn't change it's momentum and yet it has a different speed vector after is exits the curvature than before it entered doesn't it? By all means show me mathematical equations on how is it possible to change the heading of the beam without changing momentum. You'll notice of course that the page doesn't change anything about momentum.

Another side, on which it is explained good is Curved Spacetime:

Light travels along the shortest path between two points in spacetime (a geodesic). If the geodesic is curved, then the path of light is curved. Einstein proposed in his General Relativity theory that what is called gravity is really the result of curved spacetime.
http://www.astronomynotes.com/evolutn/grwarp.gif

And this has what to do with your claim that gravitational forces violate momentum? You do realize that this curved space time theory is just another explanation of the gravitational force right? How does any of this prove that there is no momentum transfer?

The Earth does not orbit the Sun because the Sun is pulling on it. The Earth is simply following the shortest path in four-dimensional spacetime.

No shit Sherlock! And Earth's probe is orbiting Jupiter for the exact same reason. And if it uses Jupiter's gravity (or in general relativity curvature in space time caused by Jupiter's mass) IT WILL SLOW DOWN JUPITER. The same goes for the light beam. Thanks for proving my point.

If you have ever taken a long flight, you probably already know that the shortest distance between two cities is not a straight line. Non-stop flights from the United States to Europe fly over parts of Greenland. On a flat map the plane's flight path looks curved, but on a globe, that path is the shortest one! Light travels along a geodesic path between two points in spacetime. Far from any gravity source, the shortest distance is a straight line in three-dimensional space. Near a massive object, the shortest distance is curved in three-dimensional space. Stephen Hawking gives the nice analogy that what we see is like the curved motion of a shadow on the ground from a plane flying in a straight line over hilly terrain.

And this proves violation of momentum how again? You do realize that map-globe is just an analogy and cannot be used to mathematically model the situation right?

It is as I have said the whole time.

No it isn't. Laser is following the shortest distance but it's momentum is changed and that is caused by curvature of space time which is caused by planetary mass. Therefore the changed momentum of light will be transfered to the mass. Curvature of space time is simply an attempt to explain why gravity exists. It is theorised that large masses bend space time and thus objects "fall in". ABSOLUTELY NOTHING in that theory suggests that it can change the heading of an object without changing it's momentum.

Really. You keep posting these articles without providing a single explanation or formula as to HOW OR WHY INTERPRETING GRAVITY AS CURVATURE IN SPACETIME MEANS THAT THERE IS NO MOMENTUM TRANSFER. Answer this.


By the way don't think I haven't noticed how you have no explanation as to why Federation ships aren't able to deflect ALL matter.
Remember what you said? ALL matter follows the space time geodesic. So why is only light affected?


P.S. Oh and there is also a small matter of you still not proving Starfleet's ability to simulate planetary masses which are essential for any kind of significant bending of light. Need I remind you AGAIN that even warp drive causes no visible light bending? Stop evading these points.

[Kane Starkiller]

Or how about this one link.

Example 6: The wobbly earth

As the moon completes half a circle around the earth, its motion reverses direction. This does not involve any change in kinetic energy, and the earth's gravitational force does not do any work on the moon. The reversed velocity vector does, however, imply a reversed momentum vector, so conservation of momentum in the closed earth-moon system tells us that the earth must also change its momentum. In fact, the earth wobbles in a little “orbit” about a point below its surface on the line connecting it and the moon. The two bodies' momentum vectors always point in opposite directions and cancel each other out.

Well would you look at that! The moon and Earth only affect each other through gravity or in other words space time curvature and yet they STILL transfer momentum on each other so Earth "wobbles".
Incidentatally this is how most of extrasolar planets are detected. We see a star "wobbling" and this is how we know there is a massive planet near by that circles around the star and as it transfers it's momentum to it the star "dances" of center.

[Who is like God arbour]

Kane Starkiller,

let us try it another way. Please explain this:

Light has a momentum. That is known and I have never doubt it. As you self are saying, the momentum of light depends on the energy of it. Light with higher energy has more momentum than light with less energy.

Light takes always the shortest path between two points through space-time, the geodesics.

If by only following the geodesics momentum is transferred, how comes it, that light, regardless of its energy, is always following the same path around the same gravity source?

It's not that light with more energy is more attracted to that source or more repulsed by that source than light with less energy? According to you, it loses momentum. But it doesn't lose energy. It's, when it leaves the gravitation field, as energetic as it was before it has entered the gravitation field. But it - according to you - is transferring momentum to the gravity creating source. The source is pushed away. It gains energy while the light doesn't lose energy. That sounds like a way to create energy from nothing.

[Kane Starkiller]

Kane Starkiller,

let us try it another way. Please explain this:

Light has a momentum. That is known and I have never doubt it. As you self are saying, the momentum of light depends on the energy of it. Light with higher energy has more momentum than light with less energy.

Light takes always the shortest path between two points through space-time, the geodesics.

If by only following the geodesics momentum is transferred, how comes it, that light, regardless of its energy, is always following the same path around the same gravity source?


It's not that light with more energy is more attracted to that source or more repulsed by that source than light with less energy? According to you, it loses momentum. But it doesn't lose energy. It's, when it leaves the gravitation field, as energetic as it was before it has entered the gravitation field. But it - according to you - is transferring momentum to the gravity creating source. The source is pushed away. It gains energy while the light doesn't lose energy. That sounds like a way to create energy from nothing.

There is a difference between the CHANGE in scalar and vector value of the momentum. The scalar value of the ligh't momentum is the same but the vector value is different. Suppose you fire a bullet into armor and the bullet bounces back at the same speed. The scalar value of the momentum will therefore be the same BUT since the vector of speed is now reversed that means that momentum is ALSO reversed which means that armor had to ABSORB the momentum of the bullet and then TRANSFER it back at the bullet. The same goes with the light. It's heading and therefore it's momentum is changed. Something HAD to cause that change and whatever it was it was affected. In this case it was the object causing the space time curvature.
It's not just that light changes course while INSIDE the space time curvature but it's heading REMAINS CHANGED after it exits.
Look at this image you yourself posted:

See how the light continues on a different path after it leaves the curvature? It's momentum is changed. There is no doubt. The other line shows the original path and it is obvious it is not the same heading. If two objects don't have the same speed vector they cannot possibly have the same momentum now can they?
Why have you ignored my link that explicitly states how moon's momentum is causing Earth to move? Through the gravity in other words through the curvature in space time?

[Who is like God arbour]

I'm still checking something. That could last some time. You will hear from me.

That's not a concession. I need only some time. Regardless how the results will be, I will response and either conceeding that you are right or not.

[Who is like God arbour]

Okay, my enquiry was successful.

I have posted Prof. Vincent Moncrief from Yale. He is Professor of Physics and Mathematics and is specialised in Gravitation Physics [1].

My e-mail reads as follows:

• • • • Dear Prof. Moncrief,
        
        I have participated in an online debate about a topic, that should fall in your faculty. We weren’t able to find a solution to our problem and I’m hoping that you are able and willing to help us.
        
        We have discussed what would happen, if a really powerful laser enters an area of space in which the space-time is curved due to a gravitation creating source. The laser doesn’t hit but miss that gravitation creating source but would still be affected by the space-time curvature.

        • • • 

        We think to know that the laser would take the shortest way between two points in that area of space, called geodsics or worldline, and that that line appears curved if one looks from outside of that so curved space.
        
        My opponent has argued that, if the laser is only powerful enough, it would transfer enough momentum to the gravitation creating source and would push it away. That it transfers momentum - although it doesn’t hit the gravitation creating source - would follow from the law of conservation of momentum. The laser has, when it leaves the gravitation field another path then before it has entered the gravitation field. Therefore something in that field has somehow changed the path of the laser and that is only possible while transferring momentum. He thinks, that the gravitation creating source is pushed away by that laser. The more powerful the laser is, the stronger it would push the gravitation creating source away.
        
        I have argued that the laser doesn’t really experience a change. In the space, it is flying, it is still flying straight away. It is not bend in response to gravitation but the geodesics looks bent in three dimensions but is in its four dimensions still straight. Because the laser isn’t really experiencing any changes, it doesn’t transmit momentum to the gravity creating source. And if at all, if the laser is really powerful, the gravitation it is creating itself would increase to a not anymore negligible level and would even attract another gravitation creating source. In no case would a laser, regardless how powerful it is, push another gravitation creating source away only because it enters its gravitation field.
        
        We aren’t able to agree and need an objective opinion. Who is right - or rather, what would really happen in the described scenario?
        
        Hoping that you are able to help us, I thank you and remain respectfully yours
        
        Who is like God arbour
        
        
        
        P.S.
        That is only a nickname I’m using while online. I hope you can accept, that I’m not willing to reveal my real name and doesn’t think of me as disrespectful.

His answer reads as follows:

• • • • Dear Sir,
        Let me assume that you are dealing with a so-called 'asymptotically flat' spacetime which is reasonable for a discussion of isolated bodies like these. Then one has a well-defined conserved momentum that one can compute from a surface integral in the asymptotic region. The contribution of the laser beam really is modified by the source body (i.e., it is different at the outgoing end from what it was at the incoming end--this is computable by solving the geodesic equations in the curved spacetime but most easily interpreted in the asymptotic regio which is essentially flat). In your diagram this corresponds to an incremental momentum pointing downwards. But this must be compensated by an opposing change of the contribution to the total momentum by the source body. Thus the source must acquire a momentum vector pointing upwards (i.e., toward not away from the passing light beam). One can think of this as due to the fact that the energy in the laser beam attracts the source body (and doesn't repel it as your opponent argues). I haven't done this calculation explicitly but, because of the above reasoning, I think I disagree with both you and your opponent (if I understand your positions correctly). I hope the above is helpful.
        
        Yours,
        
        Vincent Moncrief

That's an answer with which I can life because that answer doesn't contradict my natural understanding. I have already said, that a powerful enough laser would have an own gravitation field and would attract other gravitation creating sources [2]. The notion that the laser would repulse other objects was inconsistent with all I have ever learned.

I have sended Prof. Vincent Moncrief the following thanks:

• • • • Dear Prof. Moncrief,
        
        thank you very much. That helps indeed. It’s not exactly what I have argued but have deemed for more possible than that there is a repulsion due to the transfer of momentum.
        
        I remain respectfully yours
        
        Who is like God arbour

[Praeothmin]

Well, W.I.L.G.A., if (and that's a very big "if") I understand correctly, since mass and energy are interchangeable, the more energy the laser has, the more mass it seems to have in regards to momentum.

Due to that fact, it imparts a change of momentum to the affecting object (the E-D in this instance) just as the E-D creates the "curvature".
So to "fight off" this change in momentum caused by the high powered laser, the E-D will have to affect a change in its own momentum.
The higher the laser's power, the bigger the effect on the E-D's momentum, so the bigger the energy need from the E-D to counter ths momentum change.

So we're still at the point where an immensily powerful Laser would entail an immense power expenditure from the E-D.
Since the E-D doesn't have unlimited energy generating capacity, then there will be limits on the power fo the laser the navigational deflectors can affect.

[Kane Starkiller]

Well I never really thought about in which direction light will end up moving the object but it will move it, that much is clear from his response. Which means that sufficiently powerful laser beam will simply pull the blocking object in front of it and then blow it away.

[Who is like God arbour]

Well I never really thought about in which direction light will end up moving the object but it will move it, that much is clear from his response.

Yes, that's why I was honest enough to post it. But to say, that you have never really thought about in which direction light will end up moving the object seems to me not honest. You was quite adamant about the pushing effect of the light. That's why I have even brought forward the term anti-gravity.
But - as I have said already several times [1] - a powerful laser would create a noticeable gravity field and would therefore attract other gravity creating sources.

Which means that sufficiently powerful laser beam will simply pull the blocking object in front of it and then blow it away.

That's the question. It the navigation shield would create only one single object, that is creating the gravity field, you may be right. But what would happen, if the navigation shield is constantly creating a space-time curvature? The laser would attract it but it would be at once renewed.

Another question would be, if there is a theoretical limit, a laser can have. To be honest, I'm not sure. But I think that the amount of photons, that can be in a certain volume of space, is limited. One could increase the energy per photon. But wouldn't that increase also the frequency of the photon? And would a laser with an only high enough frequency pass through matter withouth harming it so that such a laser would be useless? From that point, there could be a natural limitation, how strong a laser could get.

But even if not, how stong has a laser to be, to attract another gravtiation creating source, that was originally able to deflect it about some degrees? Let us assume that the source is comparable to a neutron star. How strong has a laser to be to draw such a source into its path?

I would assume that it would has to have astronomically power values.

As long as only such a laser could penetrate the defense, the navigation shield allone is giving, I'm ready to conceede, that Picard has not meant such lasers. He would have thought only at reasonable powerful lasers and not lasers that are practicall impossible because if a ship would store so much energy, it itself would create a gravitation field, that would kill the crew and destroy the ship.

[Jedi Master Spock]

Well, if you go below the Schwarzschild radius, then yes, there is a limit, but it's really ridiculously high.

The basic thing to bear in mind is that a laser has an effective relativistic mass equal to E/c^2 - even though its rest mass is zero.

As far as pulling the blocking object in front of it and then blowing it away - well, you're actually going to have to have a fairly long sustained beam for that as well as a very powerful beam. For the most part, a ship will be deflected into the wake of the laser attack - and when we go back to the original problem, Trek ships are capable of resisting/creating fairly high acceleration jolts.

To go back to the original question a little bit... if you bend the beam wholly around back towards its source (i.e., pass the laser behind the gravitational source deflecting it) that you'll effectively deflect the ship away from the beam.

To pull out some figures as to how much the beam will suck an object... you might bear in mind that a 1 teraton bolt with a rest mass of zero has a relativistic mass of less than 50 tons. You have to get out to the sort of order of magnitude required to blow up a planet before you start noticing suction on normal objects at any range - for example, a 1e32 J beam with a negligible length pulls objects in at 1 gee or more acceleration within an 87 m radius.

A 1e38 J continuous beam with a length of, say, 300,000 km (1 second duration laser blast) will have near it a field of 250/R meters per second squared, where r is the distance - i.e., noticable within a couple hundred meters, but it's only going to suck in objects that are really close already.

[Kane Starkiller]

Which still neatly refutes the INFINITE strength lasers theory.
As for more practical uses we know that Federation ships can in fact be threatened by light emitted by stars.
Who is like God arbour said something about "omnidirectional light" being more difficult to stop but light emitted by stars is not omnidirectional. It strikes only one side of the ship and the ships were obviously not immune to that. If they could somehow "bend" it they would.
Plus there are other unanswered points about how phasers and photon torpedoes can threaten ships.

[Praeothmin]

Once mre, I have to agree with Kane.

There have been far too many examples of light (or rays) hurting Fed ships to believe that they are immune to all lasers.

[Who is like God arbour]

Which still neatly refutes the INFINITE strength lasers theory.

As I see, you have ignored the question from me what would happen, if the space-time curvature is constantly renewed. The laser would attract it but at the same moment at the same place, a new space-time curvature is created by the navigation shield. It's not like a single object but more like a river that is continuously providing the energy for the creation of the space-time curvature.

And I have already conceeded that a laser will attract other gravitation creating sources. But according to Jedi Master Spock, even
a laser that could destroy a planet, would be insufficient to attract another gravity creating source fast enough. It has to last a very very long time until such a source would be attracted in its path.

And even than, the navigation shield would create a new space-time curvature. I have never seen or read in Science Fiction about a laser with such power.

As for more practical uses we know that Federation ships can in fact be threatened by light emitted by stars.
Who is like God arbour said something about "omnidirectional light" being more difficult to stop but light emitted by stars is not omnidirectional. It strikes only one side of the ship and the ships were obviously not immune to that. If they could somehow "bend" it they would.

Each point on the ship, that is hit by light, is hit by omnidirectional light. It is comming from all directions but from the directions where the Enterprise is. I have tried to demonstrate it at that image with only four points on the Enterprise.

• 

Now imagine that the same happens on each single point on the Enterprise that is directed to the sun. If you deflect the path of light coming from one direction, you automatically deflect the path of light that was going in another direction and would have never hit the Enterprise on a path on which it will hit the ship.

A corona, in which the Enterprise was for sevral minutes, is a type of plasma "atmosphere" and is with one to three million kelvin much hotter than the visible surface of the Sun. The electro-magnetic radiation would hit all sides of a ship, that is inside a corona, even the sides that are facing away from the sun.

As I have already said several times, it would be necessary to create a kind of space pocket in which the ship can hide. The ability to create gravitational lenses is useless in such a situation.

Plus there are other unanswered points about how phasers and photon torpedoes can threaten ships.

Because, as I have already said, they are not affected that much by gravitation. We have seen how phaser fire was exchanged at warp at distances that are far greater than the warp field. Ergo: phasers are able to propagate faster than light. That's only possible if they have not only no rest mass but even a negative rest mass in our space-time continuum. Maybe they somehow source out their mass to subspace. The same could do a photon torpedo. But that's only speculation.
Fact is that they are different enough from light that it is very possible that they can do things, light is not able to do. Here we have to accept that there is an unexplainable part in Star Trek because we simply don't know enough about phasers, warp, subspace and how photon torpedos are travelling faster than light.

Once mre, I have to agree with Kane.

There have been far too many examples of light (or rays) hurting Fed ships to believe that they are immune to all lasers.

Provide only one single event, in which a laser has damaged a Fed ship (with active navigation deflector).

Omnidirectional radiation is a another problem, as I have tried to show. The mechanism with which it would be able to deflect (reroute) a laser doesn't work with omnidirectional radiation.

[Kane Starkiller]

As I see, you have ignored the question from me what would happen, if the space-time curvature is constantly renewed. The laser would attract it but at the same moment at the same place, a new space-time curvature is created by the navigation shield. It's not like a single object but more like a river that is continuously providing the energy for the creation of the space-time curvature.

And the power to "constantly renew" those curvatures comes from where exactly?

Each point on the ship, that is hit by light, is hit by omnidirectional light. It is comming from all directions but from the directions where the Enterprise is. I have tried to demonstrate it at that image with only four points on the Enterprise.
Now imagine that the same happens on each single point on the Enterprise that is directed to the sun. If you deflect the path of light coming from one direction, you automatically deflect the path of light that was going in another direction and would have never hit the Enterprise on a path on which it will hit the ship.

A corona, in which the Enterprise was for sevral minutes, is a type of plasma "atmosphere" and is with one to three million kelvin much hotter than the visible surface of the Sun. The electro-magnetic radiation would hit all sides of a ship, that is inside a corona, even the sides that are facing away from the sun.

As I have already said several times, it would be necessary to create a kind of space pocket in which the ship can hide. The ability to create gravitational lenses is useless in such a situation.

First of all most of the energy a star emits goes straight "up". Only a miniscule amount is reflected sideways. Which means that with the magical space-time curvature the Enterprise could block all the light that is emitted beneath it an if it's shields can't even block the miniscule radiation coming from sides than it's shields are even more pathetic than I thought.
Secondly while corona is very hot it also has trillion times smaller density than air so it's energy content and light reflection is insignificant. Again if the combat shields can't handle the amount of light reflected by corona they are utterly pathetic.

Because, as I have already said, they are not affected that much by gravitation. We have seen how phaser fire was exchanged at warp at distances that are far greater than the warp field. Ergo: phasers are able to propagate faster than light. That's only possible if they have not only no rest mass but even a negative rest mass in our space-time continuum. Maybe they somehow source out their mass to subspace. The same could do a photon torpedo. But that's only speculation.
Fact is that they are different enough from light that it is very possible that they can do things, light is not able to do. Here we have to accept that there is an unexplainable part in Star Trek because we simply don't know enough about phasers, warp, subspace and how photon torpedos are travelling faster than light.

Where have the phaser beams been exchanged at far greater distance than the warp field? You are still missing the point: the phasers DON'T MOVE FASTER THAN LIGHT relative to the firing ships.
And "source out their mass to subspace"? You'll use any desperate handwave rather than concede won't you?

Provide only one single event, in which a laser has damaged a Fed ship (with active navigation deflector).

Provide one singe event where a Fed ship has withstood a laser of INFINITE power. Or at least provide one single event where someone stated a Fed ship could withstand a laser of INFINITE power.

Omnidirectional radiation is a another problem, as I have tried to show. The mechanism with which it would be able to deflect (reroute) a laser doesn't work with omnidirectional radiation.

It is only a problem if the combat shields of Fed ships are so weak they can even block the reflected light after the supposedly immune nav deflectors have eliminated the light emmited directly from the solar surface beneath the ship.

[Who is like God arbour]

As I see, you have ignored the question from me what would happen, if the space-time curvature is constantly renewed. The laser would attract it but at the same moment at the same place, a new space-time curvature is created by the navigation shield. It's not like a single object but more like a river that is continuously providing the energy for the creation of the space-time curvature.

And the power to "constantly renew" those curvatures comes from where exactly?

Stupid question. you know exactly, that that would come from the Enterprise. And before you start, I have already conceeded, that a space-time curvature, the Enterprise could create, is not able to deflect irrational powerful lasers for a long time.

Each point on the ship, that is hit by light, is hit by omnidirectional light. It is comming from all directions but from the directions where the Enterprise is. I have tried to demonstrate it at that image with only four points on the Enterprise.
Now imagine that the same happens on each single point on the Enterprise that is directed to the sun. If you deflect the path of light coming from one direction, you automatically deflect the path of light that was going in another direction and would have never hit the Enterprise on a path on which it will hit the ship.

A corona, in which the Enterprise was for sevral minutes, is a type of plasma "atmosphere" and is with one to three million kelvin much hotter than the visible surface of the Sun. The electro-magnetic radiation would hit all sides of a ship, that is inside a corona, even the sides that are facing away from the sun.

As I have already said several times, it would be necessary to create a kind of space pocket in which the ship can hide. The ability to create gravitational lenses is useless in such a situation.

First of all most of the energy a star emits goes straight "up". Only a miniscule amount is reflected sideways.

Elaborate that statement. That contradicts what I have learned. As far as I know, each atom in a sun is very energized and will emit photons in all directions. That means that light is going from each point of the sun in all directions and not only (or mainly) in a straight line from the center of the sun away.

Which means that with the magical space-time curvature the Enterprise could block all the light that is emitted beneath it an if it's shields can't even block the miniscule radiation coming from sides than it's shields are even more pathetic than I thought.
Secondly while corona is very hot it also has trillion times smaller density than air so it's energy content and light reflection is insignificant. Again if the combat shields can't handle the amount of light reflected by corona they are utterly pathetic.

I can adress that point only after you have elaborated you presumption.

Because, as I have already said, they are not affected that much by gravitation. We have seen how phaser fire was exchanged at warp at distances that are far greater than the warp field. Ergo: phasers are able to propagate faster than light. That's only possible if they have not only no rest mass but even a negative rest mass in our space-time continuum. Maybe they somehow source out their mass to subspace. The same could do a photon torpedo. But that's only speculation.
Fact is that they are different enough from light that it is very possible that they can do things, light is not able to do. Here we have to accept that there is an unexplainable part in Star Trek because we simply don't know enough about phasers, warp, subspace and how photon torpedos are travelling faster than light.

Where have the phaser beams been exchanged at far greater distance than the warp field? You are still missing the point: the phasers DON'T MOVE FASTER THAN LIGHT relative to the firing ships.

In the Voyager episode "Non Sequitur" a phaser was fired at high warp pursuit at a distance between both ships of nearly five thousand kilometers. Do you want to claim, that the warp field is that large?

If one ship is flying faster than light and is firing a phaser that flies through normal space and is overtaking another ship that is also flying with warp, the phaser is propagating faster than light. If the ship would fire a laser, it would overtake the laser at once because the laser travels never faster than light, regardless the speed the source from which it is fired, has.

And "source out their mass to subspace"? You'll use any desperate handwave rather than concede won't you?

First, that was only an example.
Second, that was not my idea. I have no clue, how the mass lightening effect that enables faster than light travel is working. But it is working in Star Trek and it has something to do with subspace. If you have another explanation, I would like to learn it.

Provide only one single event, in which a laser has damaged a Fed ship (with active navigation deflector).

Provide one singe event where a Fed ship has withstood a laser of INFINITE power. Or at least provide one single event where someone stated a Fed ship could withstand a laser of INFINITE power.

Now you are daft. Do you want to hear again, that I have conceeded that a laser of infinite power was not meant by Picard?

But you act at the same time, as if you would be stupid. A laser of INFINITE power is impossible. You are demanding an impossible proof.

But your stupid red herring doesn't answer the asked question. We have the statement from Picard that "Lasers can't even penetrate [...] navigation shields.". He has not said "weak lasers" nor "their lasers".

Assuming that he hasn't meant astronomical powerful lasers, that still means that lasers (weak, normal and powerful lasers - but not unreasonable powerful lasers) are not able to penetrate the navigation shield.

We could disprove that statement, if we would have one single event in which a laser has penetrated the navigation shield. If we would then know the power of the laser, we would know, that the navigation shield is not able to withstand lasers with such and more power.

But the problem is, that there is no such event. All we still have is Picards statement. If you want to disprove it further, you have the burden of proof.

Omnidirectional radiation is a another problem, as I have tried to show. The mechanism with which it would be able to deflect (reroute) a laser doesn't work with omnidirectional radiation.

It is only a problem if the combat shields of Fed ships are so weak they can even block the reflected light after the supposedly immune nav deflectors have eliminated the light emmited directly from the solar surface beneath the ship.

You still have to elaborate your claim, that most of the energy a star emits goes straight "up". Until that claim is proven correct, your conclusion is questionable.