There are two opposing points of view on the nature of light: the first one manifests the wave-particle duality as a fundamental property of the nature; the second one claims that photons do not exist and the light is a continuous classical wave, while the so-called “quantum” properties of this field appear only as a result of its interaction with matter. In this paper we show that many quantum phenomena which are traditionally described by quantum electrodynamics can be described if light is considered within the limits of classical electrodynamics without quantization of radiation. These phenomena include the double-slit experiment, the photoelectric effect, the Compton effect, the Hanbury Brown and Twiss effect, the so-called multiphoton ionisation of atoms, etc. We show that this point of view allows also explaining the “wave-particle duality” of light in Wiener experiments with standing waves. We show that the Born rule for light can easily be derived from Fermi’s golden rule as an approximation for low-intense light or for short exposure time. We show that the Heisenberg uncertainty principle for “photons” has a simple classical sense and cannot be considered as a fundamental limitation of accuracy of simultaneous measurements of position and momentum or time and energy. We conclude that the concept of a “photon” is superfluous in explanation of light-matter interactions.
There are two opposing points of view on the nature of light: the first one manifests the wave-particle duality as a fundamental property of the nature; the second one claims that photons do not exist and the light is a continuous classical wave, while the so-called “quantum” properties of this field appear only as a result of its interaction with matter. In this paper we show that many quantum phenomena which are traditionally described by quantum electrodynamics can be described if light is considered within the limits of classical electrodynamics without quantization of radiation. These phenomena include the double-slit experiment, the photoelectric effect, the Compton effect, the Hanbury Brown and Twiss effect, the so-called multiphoton ionisation of atoms, etc. We show that this point of view allows also explaining the “wave-particle duality” of light in Wiener experiments with standing waves. We show that the Born rule for light can easily be derived from Fermi’s golden rule as an approximation for low-intense light or for short exposure time. We show that the Heisenberg uncertainty principle for “photons” has a simple classical sense and cannot be considered as a fundamental limitation of accuracy of simultaneous measurements of position and momentum or time and energy. We conclude that the concept of a “photon” is superfluous in explanation of light-matter interactions.
The wave-particle duality is a fundamental property of the nature. At the same time, it is one of the greatest mysteries of modern physics. This gave rise to a whole direction in quantum physics - the interpretation of quantum mechanics. The Wiener experiments demonstrating the wave-particle duality of light are discussed. It is shown that almost all interpretations of quantum mechanics allow explaining the double-slit experiments, but are powerless to explain the Wiener experiments. The reason of the paradox, associated with the wave-particle duality is analyzed. The quantum theory consists of two independent parts: (i) the dynamic equations describing the behavior of a quantum object (for example, the Schrodinger or Maxwell equations), and (ii) the Born’s rule, the relation between the wave function and the probability of finding the particle at a given point. It is shown that precisely the Born’s rule results in paradox in explaining the wave-particle duality. In order to eliminate this paradox, we propose a new rational interpretation of the wave-particle duality and associated new rule, connecting the corpuscular and wave properties of quantum objects. It is shown that this new rational interpretation of the wave-particle duality allows using the classic images of particle and wave in explaining the quantum mechanical and optical phenomena, does not result in paradox in explaining the doubleslit experiments and Wiener experiments, and does not contradict to the modern quantum mechanical concepts. It is shown that the Born’s rule follows immediately from proposed new rules as an approximation.
This paper reviews humanity's understanding of photons, the evolution of quantum mechanics and quantum electrodynamics (QED), and analyzes their physical interpretations and philosophical implications. It attempts to uncover the true nature of photons by exploring possible hidden variables in the double-slit experiment. The wave-particle duality of photons, as posited by quantum mechanics, appears to me to lack verisimilitude. By designing a thought experiment involving a photon double-slit setup, I seek to falsify the notion that photons generate coherence, or so-called wave-function superposition, within the light field between the slits and the screen. This endeavour aims to demonstrate the pure particle nature of photons. This paper further explores the intrinsic relationship between electromagnetic waves and photons by examining the wavelength of electromagnetic radiation. It posits that electromagnetic waves are fundamentally pure particle-waves. An analysis of QED elucidates the potential influence of photon momentum on photon interactions, an effect that could have profound implications for quantum information transmission. This paper explores the non-wave-particle duality of photons through the double-slit experiment and the double-slit observer experiment. The essence of photons is purely particle-like. The thought experiment of the photon double-slit experiment is pivotal in demonstrating that photons and other particles—such as electrons, atoms, and macromolecules—are purely particulate in nature. Moreover, in space, photons can interfere with each other's paths based on their momentum. This can simultaneously alter the trajectory of photons and even modify their velocity. That is to say, a photon beam possessing greater momentum may carry along a portion of photon beams with lesser momentum, propagating them over considerable distances. The wavelength of a light wave fundamentally represents the distance between consecutive photons as they queue and advance through space. A longer wavelength corresponds to a greater distance between photons, causing them to diverge more widely in space, as seen with radio waves. Conversely, a shorter wavelength implies closer proximity between photons, resulting in denser emission and a highly directional nature, as seen in gamma rays. Photons within the visible spectrum may occasionally transmit information bearing specific content. This information, conveyed via photons, can propagate over distances ranging from several metres to thousands of kilometres.
The idea of the photon has stirred the imaginations of physicists ever since 1905 when Einstein originally proposed the use of light quanta to explain the photoelectric effect. This concept is formalized in the quantum theory of radiation, which has had unfailing success in explaining the interaction of electromagnetic radiation with matter, seemingly limited only by the ability of physicists to perform the indicated calculations. Nevertheless, it has its conceptual problems—various infinities and frequent misinterpretations. Consequently an increasing number of workers are asking, “to what extent is the quantized field really necessary and useful?” In fact the experimental results of the photoelectric effect were explained by G. Wentzel in 1927 without the quantum theory of radiation. Similarly most electro-optic phenomena such as stimulated emission, reaction of the emitted field on the emitting atom, resonance fluorescence, and so on, do not require the quantization of the field for their explanation. As we will see, these processes can all be quantitatively explained and physically understood in terms of the semiclassical theory of the matter–field interaction in which the electric field is treated classically while the atoms obey the laws of quantum mechanics. The quantized field is fundamentally required for accurate descriptions of certain processes involving fluctuations in the electromagnetic field: for example, spontaneous emission, the Lamb shift, the anomalous magnetic moment of the electron, and certain aspects of blackbody radiation. (The Compton effect also fits here, but see later under references 8b and c.) Here we will outline how the photon concept originated and developed, where it is not required and is often misused, and finally where it plays an essential role in the understanding of physical phenomena. In our discussion we will attempt to give a logically consistent definition of the word “photon”—a statement far more necessary than one might think, for so many contradictory uses exist of this elusive beast. In particular consider the original coining of the word by G. N. Lewis: “[because it appears to spend] only a minute fraction of its existence as a carrier of radiant energy, while the rest of the time it remains an important structural element within the atom…, I therefore take the liberty of proposing for this hypothetical new atom which is not light but plays an essential part in every process of radiation, the name photon!” (our exclamation point). Clearly the present usage of the word is very different.
Quantum field theory describes the particle nature of electromagnetic radiation using the "photon," but has never explained why a fundamental particle exhibits such perfect wave behavior. This paper provides a complete alternative explanation: the photoelectric effect, Compton scattering, and antibunching experiments — landmark experiments considered proof of photon particle nature — require no photon concept. Quantization is not a property of light itself, but of the discrete energy level structure governing how bound electrons emit and absorb energy. Light remains a continuous transverse wave; discreteness results from electrons as "prisoners" in atomic "cages" that can only transition between specific energy steps. Waves propagate continuously and are emitted and absorbed in quantized form — the photon is not a particle, but the name of an energy-exchange event.
Many quantum phenomena, traditionally described by quantum electrodynamics, can be calculated within the framework of so-called semiclassical theory, in which atoms are described by the wave equations of quantum mechanics (Schrödinger, Dirac, etc.), while light is described by classical electrodynamics without quantization of the radiation. These phenomena include the photoelectric effect, the Compton effect, the Lamb shift, radiative effects, spontaneous emission, the Hanbury Brown and Twiss effect, etc. In this paper, I show that the double-slit experiment can also be calculated in detail in terms of semiclassical theory if we take into account the discrete (atomic) structure of matter. I show that the results of a semiclassical simulation of the “linear” double-slit experiment coincide with predictions of wave theory only for low-intensity light and for short exposure time, while stricter dependences exist for long-term exposure. The semiclassical theory is used for calculation of the “nonlinear” double-slit experiment with an intense laser beam in which multiphoton and tunnel excitation of atoms on a photographic plate occurs. The Born rule for light is derived from the semiclassical theory.
For over a century, physics has taught that light is “both wave and particle,” with the photon elevated to a fundamental constituent of nature. This article revisits how thecorpuscular picture of light became dominant—from Newton and Huygens to Einstein’s photoelectric effect and Compton’s scattering—and argues that much of the alleged evidence for photons as “particles” can be reinterpreted more economically in a purely wave-based framework. We highlight a conceptual tension of twentieth-century quantum rhetoric: electrons and photons are routinely described as if they “knew” our experimental intentions, while any serious discussion of consciousness beyond humans is dismissed as unscientific. Building on a recently proposed geometric reinterpretation of the Compton effect—where the wavelength shift arises from field–structure coupling rather than particle–particle collisions—we show how the photoelectric effect and double-slit experiments can likewise be understood without attributing ontological particle status to light. Discreteness emerges not from light being made of corpuscles, but from quantized field modes and the event-like nature of charge in matter. The electromagnetic field remains a wave throughout; only matter clicks. This work integrates new conceptual insights, including two revealing paradoxes of the standard narrative and three implicit principles that guide our geometric reinterpretation, while preserving the full depth and detail of the original analysis.