In the precedent webpages, we have considered the wave-like behaviour of EM radiations.
Here, we study its particle-like behaviour, i.e. the photon.

This webpage is the fourth part of the website
http://www.waves-photons.com
It is strongly suggested to also read the first three pages.

Justification of the photon

The following experimentations seem to confirm the existence of the photon:

The Planck Quantum
It is a physical reality, not just a mathematical concept. This unit must be preserved.

Experimentations
Experimentations (photoelectric effect...) also tend to prove that the photon exists.
The interpretation of these experimentations is however debatable.

The EM wave decrease
This decrease in 1/r^{2} makes it impossible for a wave to exist far from its origin.
Only the photon concept can resolve this paradox.
This webpage covers this phenomenon.

Vacuum propagation
This enigma is not relevant since EM waves can be propagated in spacetime, and spacetime is present in a vacuum.
This problem is covered in Part 2 http://www.what-is-matter.com.

Notes: In 1905, when Einstein explained the PE effect using the Planck Quantum, the atom's internal
configuration was unknown.
Rutherford identified the atom to an "English pudding".
Electrons were distributed as raisins in the pudding.
In 1905, physicists did not know that the atom had a nucleus.
Einstein thought that the poor efficiency of the PE effect was in relation to the probability that the photon had
to meet an electron.
Later on, physicists demonstrated that the electron was: 1/ infinitely smaller than the nucleus and,
2/ a huge distance from it, proportionately.
It means that the collision probability between a photon and an electron is practically null, even if the number
of electrons is counted by billions.
However, and paradoxically, the yield was increased to reach more than 99% today with nanotechnologies.
This paradox remains a mystery.
The cross section calculations and other theories about the photon are highly debatable, not from their mathematical
point of view, but, in their interpretation, if we regard the photon as a particle.
The problem is that physics today has a strong orientation towards mathematics.
Without a consistent reasoning based on logic and common sense, this orientation can give wrong results.
For example, we know three different theories of mass which are mathematically verified:
1/ Higgs boson, 2/ Superstrings (E. Wirren - Field Medal -) and 3/ Spacetime Model (Part 1).
At least two of these three theories are wrong, despite the fact that they are all three mathematically verified.
It means that any theory, which is not fully explained with logic and good sense, must be considered with great care,
even if it is mathematically right.
This is the case of theories concerning the photon and the PE yield.

Inconsistencies of the photon

Its velocity
The photon's velocity is 300,000 km/s, no more, no less.
This is illogical because if the photon is a particle (even a boson), it may travel at any speed.
What would we think of a vehicle moving at only one speed, 100 km/h, no more, no less?

Its impossibility to stop
Why can not the photon stop?
No one can explain.
What would we think of a vehicle that can not stop?
This remark only applies when considering the photon as a particle (note 1).

It's massless
If the photon is a particle, how does one explain its lack of mass?

Its acceleration
How the photon can be immediately accelerate from 0 km/s to 300,000 km/s without intermediate speeds?

The causal principle
The photon concept continuously violates this principle.
Some experimentation needs a particle-like behaviour, such as photo-electric, and other a wave-like behaviour,
such as the Young Slits.
It is obvious that the photon, once emitted, has not the ability to predict its future.
It does not know its own destiny.
More precisely, it does not know if the experimenter needs a particle-like behaviour or a wave-like behaviour
for his experimentation.
Since the two behaviours do not simultaneously exist, this prediction causes a real scientific problem.
It is also a problem of good sense: NO ONE CAN PREDICT THE FUTURE.

Its constitution
What is the constitution of the photon? No one knows...

Displacement of a charged particle (note 2)
How can a charged particle that is moving emit other particles called "photons"?
It is like a stone falling into water emitting tiny stones... This concept is disconcerting

Orbital change of electrons (note 2)
In the same way, no one can explain how an electron, moving from one orbital to another,
can emit tiny particles called "photons".

EPR (note 2)
In this experimentation, it would be necessary for the photon to have a kind of thought transference with another
photon at a distance of several meters.
This view is also disconcerting.

Intrication (note 2)
This experimentation also requires a kind of thought transference with another photon at a distance of several meters.
This view is also disconcerting.

Young Slits (note 2)
Here too, the photon poses a serious problem of logic and good sense.

These eleven inconsistencies - and probably more - mean that the photon concept, despite the fact it has been used since 1905,
must be seriously revised.

Note 1: Lene Hau (Harvard University) explains how she stops light in one place then retrieves and speeds
it up in a completely separate place.
(http://www.photonics.com/Article.aspx?AID=28520).
However, this experimentation, like many others, is explained in this website.
Note 2: See the following pages.

Decrease in 1/r ^{2}

We pointed out that EM waves are propagated gradually in sCells.
At a distance "r" from the emission source, it arrives at a moment when the charge contained in a sCell becomes too weak
to be propagated in the next adjacent sCell.
This limit is, in fact, a quantum.
This is not exceptional since all objects are quantified, in one way or another.
In accordance with Max Plank, the quantum is a necessity.

The charge, which passes from one sCell to another, must be higher than this quantum.
What happens when the charge transmitted in the sCells approaches this quantum?

We have only two possibilities:

The charge disappears completely.
The EM wave dies.

The charge remains grouped.
In this case, the EM wave ceases to decrease.

The first possibility is not credible because, in Nature, nothing is created, nothing totally disappears.
Therefore, the second possibility is more reasonable.
Let's look at this possibility.

The "Quantified Wave"

The following figure represents the various steps of the wave during its travel, from its creation to a distance away.

Step 1
The wave is created in a 360° space.
Note that the angle may have other values.
Experimentations about this topic must be done.

Step 2
At some distance from its source, the decrease in 1/r^{2} of the EM wave reaches its quantum.
The spacetime density of the wave is too weak to continue to decrease.
The wave has only one solution: to break at an unspecified place to remain grouped.

Step 3
The distance increases, and the arc of the circle decreases proportionally.

Step 4
The wave is now very far away from its source and its curvature becomes practically a segment or, in quantum mechanics
terms, a "wave pack".
The EM wave always keeps its wave behaviour while remaining grouped.
It can thus travel billions of light-years.
This small piece of wave is nothing but the whole wave grouped, or "photon".
It means that the photon is, in reality, a small piece of wave.

This is what we call a "quantified wave".

So, when we see galaxies for example, our eyes do not perceive a photon but a "quantified wave".
During all its travel, this wave remained grouped.

Let's now consider the three phases, emission, propagation, and reception of a quantified wave.

1/ Emission

EM radiations are spacetime movements. They are not emitted as photons but as EM waves.

2/ Propagation

Once emitted, EM radiations remain in waveform.
Beyond a certain distance, since the charge can not go under a quantum, there is a possibility that an
"ordinary wave" becomes a "quantified wave".

The following figure shows an EM wave that is propagated gradually in sCells.
The charge is q at the source level, and is divided by 3, then by 5.
In this figure, the quantum q/5 is reached at Time t2.
The EM wave does not continue decreasing over time t2 because the quantum is reached.

3/ Reception

When a part of the wave inside a sCell meets an element, atom or something else, an interaction may take place.
The sCell is emptied of its charge.
Gradually, it empties other adjacent sCells of the wave.

Phase 1
The EM wave propagates as a "normal wave" or as a "quantified wave".

Phase 2
It meets an element that absorbs its energy.
The sCell in contact is emptied.
This element is not necessarily in the centre and can be anywhere at the front of the wave.

Phases 3 and 4
The EM wave continues to be absorbed by the element.
The sCells are gradually emptied, step-by-step, sCell-by-sCell.

Phase 5
The EM wave is almost completely absorbed by the element of interaction.

Example

The following figure shows that an identical process also exists in the daily life.
The EM wave is replaced by a trickle of water.
The particle, which absorbs energy of the wave, is replaced by a blotting paper.
The trickle of water is absorbed by the blotting paper at the place of interaction (measurement).
Finally, the trickle of water diseappears to be completely absorbed by the blotting paper.

The Experimenter

This example shows that the experimenter is unable to say if he has measured a photon or an EM wave
since the two elements lead to identical results.

Putting the blotting paper anywhere on the trickle of water produces the disappearance of it.
In spacetime we have the same phenomenon.
The experimenter believes that, at the red point of interaction, he measures a photon but in reality, he measures a quantified wave
which disappears just after the measurement.

The simple fact of measuring the EM
wave produces the disappearance of it,
giving the illusion of having measured
a virtual photon-like particle

Dq/Dt

As we know, a stone makes eddies only when it moves.
We have exactly the same phenomenon in spacetime.
A motionless electron does not create any perturbation, or wave.
It does when it moves.

So, we have a perfect match between this phenomenon on Earth (a stone in water) and electromagnetism
(Dq/Dt).
In both cases, the moving object produres eddies, or waves, which can be transformed in "quantified waves" if necessary.

Since the 1905s, we consider that a moving particle emits tiny particles called "photons".
Despite its popularity, this concept is disconcerting and does not make sense.
Replacing "Photons" by "Quantified waves" solves this inconsistency.

Validation of the proposed explanation

We already have multiple reasons to agree the proposed explanation of electromagnetism:

The constant speed of light, 300,000 km/s, proves that we are in front of a wave and not of a corpuscle.
The light can not be accelerated, can not be stopped, and has a constant speed.
These characteristics are not those of corpuscles.

Saying that the "mass" of the photon is null is inconsistent.
Only a wave has a null mass, not a particle.

The displacement of a charged particle (Dq/Dt)
cannot emit tiny particles called "photons".
This does not make sense.
If we replace "photons" by (quantified) waves, this enigma becomes consistent.

...and much more inconsistencies... (see section "Inconsistencies of the Photon" at the top of this page
and in the next section).

Replacing "photon" by
"quantified wave" solves all of these
inconsistencies, and many more

Conclusions

The photon is the mathematical expression
of an EM wave.

The EM wave may be quantified if the
distance requires it.

It is absorbed at the place of
measurement (= photon).