A Neutrino is not a magic particle. The reason they do not interact very well with the electromagnetic field is they have neutral charge since they are made up of an electron and a positron. The electric charge cancels out and so does the magnetic field when they are in motion as a pair. Which brings up the question of why can neutrinos not break the speed of light? This is because even if the magnetic fields are being canceled out they are still being generated, this is what imposes a speed limit on them. If not then it should be possible to get a neutrino to exceed the light speed of light with timed/pulsed events easily. The missing kind of neutrino has Zero Spin and Zero Motion, and as I have stated before is the universe's reference point, ground, or the lowest possible energy state allowed to exist in the universe for any length of time.
The mass of a neutrino should not be such a great mystery. A neutron can turn into a proton during beta decay. A neutron has 939.565 MeV/c squared of energy a proton has 938.272 MeV/c squared leaving 1.293 MeV/c squared. Simple logic tells us we have to lose three charges to get a neutron to become a proton. We have to lose two negative charges and one positive one or else the new particle would not be positive now would it? An electron has 0.511 MeV/c squared worth of energy, which is close to being a third of the difference. Since we know that groups of particles have less mass then their individual parts sum up to separately I think it clearly shows how a neutrino is made up of an electron and a positron. The mass of a neutrino should therefore be between 1.022 and 0.862 MeV/c squared.
The only way a neutrino could be smaller then an electron is if there were charge carriers smaller then an electron. This is another logic puzzle or question, why have a neutral particle that is smaller then the charged particles, what makes up the neutral particle? It is easy to make a neutral particle from two oppositely charged particles. How can we make charged particles from neutral ones? We cannot now can we? Why is a neutron larger then a proton? I understand that they are hard to measure, but cannot understand why people think that neutrinos are smaller then electrons. They even come in the same flavors, electrons, muons, and taus. The velocity of them will slow down as they get closer to the center of a source of (negative) gravity or body of mass, just like light and EM waves do too.
How does an electron create a photon? I have stated that photons are nothing more then fictitious particles made up to satisfy the math, this is why they have zero rest mass, or cannot be stopped and still have mass. They must be moving to exist, as I said before they are fictitious particles. Can an electron give off a photon without changing its orbital or velocity? What happens when an electron does change orbits? Does the amount of vacuum energy, free energy, fine structure constant, etc. that is displaced not change too as the electron changes orbitals? The displacement would increase for an instant in time until the extra energy is transfered to another electron or positron outside the old orbital, but inside the new one. The orbiting electron would clear out a path if it had enough energy, but in most cases after a single collision it transfers its energy and drops back down to its original orbit. Even if it did not hit the other particles, it would still influence the paths of those particles due to the electron's charge and magnetic field. I do not think I need to explain how a laser can work without photons since that relates to a change in velocity.
Dark Energy is nothing more then out of phase thermal energy or motion. The Big Bang made all kinds of high order matter like hydrogen, helium, etc. from energy. Matter is burning, fussing, etc. as time goes on and going back to energy. This is causing the universe to expand as energy is trying to find a spot to go. It wants to find a "ground" or low energy spot to STOP moving in. Until it finds one of those spots, it is not happy and will continue to want to move. The only spots for a neutral energy pair to go in the universe then is someplace that is below or colder then the Cosmic Background Radiation, or outside of the universe. A new pair can kick out an old pair that has already found a spot, but since they are interchangeable it does not matter, the universe has to expand due to the Pauli Exclusion Principle. Dark energy is the lag or delay in the motion of the expansion of the universe, the background pressure.
Electron-Positron annihilation I have discussed before. I just wanted to point out that I find it funny that when they annihilate they normally produce two gamma ray photons. Those two gamma ray photons can recombine to make an electron and positron. What was the whole point behind that little circle jerk again, to try to prove that your physics theory is not based on magic? Maybe you forced the pair to go to the ground state, which affects the other surrounding pairs. The surrounding pairs were somewhat happy before you shoved another pair in the middle of them, they now have to spread out and move to make room for the new pair. The universe expands a little since to get enough energy to cause the reaction to happen in the in the first place you had to convert matter to energy. Something massive had to lose mass in order to get motion and energy. How did that massive object get its mass in the first place? An entire process is ignored due to oversimplification and the use of frames of reference. If your physics theory only works from one "preferred" perspective, there is a problem.