A New Angle for Explaining the Wave-Particle Duality of Light

Abstract

The Wave-Particle duality of Light should be considered as an unresolved mystery. Indeed, Light manifests these two very different phenomena simultaneously . On one hand Light should be viewed as a stream of Particles. Einstein initially introduced the understanding that Light should be viewed as a stream of Particles (named Photons), to explain the Photoelectric effect. On the other hand, Light clearly exhibits a Wave facet, dating back to Newton’s days, who measured the wavelength of Li ght with his Newton’s rings interference observations . However, these two very different facets of Light, its Particle facet, and its Wave facet, are so significantly different , which implies that the Wave-Particle duality of Light still awaits additional clarification and additional explanation, which was not yet provided by mainstream Physics. Instead, nowadays mainstream Physics just accepts the fact that Light embed these two very different facets simultaneously , and exhibits each facet in different experiments or situations. This paper proposes a new angle for explaining the Wave-Particle duality of Light, based on the famous Mutual Annihilation process, in which an Electron and a Positron annihilate each other to create Photons, and on the famous inverse Pair Production process, in which a Photon, in certain conditions, converts back into a pair of an Electron and a Positron. Actually, the connection between the nature of Photons and the Electron and the Positron is already presented in another paper, namely, the Electron Positron-Photon idea. The Electron Positron-Photon idea, which is due originally to (the late) Prof. J. P. Wesley, in his paper titled: “Light, a Flux of Electric Dipole Photons” [4], proposed a model of the Photon as an Electric Dipole Photon which might be an Electron-Positron pair separated by a distance L. There are two reasons why the Electron Positron-Photon idea, as presented in Prof. J. P. Wesley's paper, cannot be considered a viable concept: