Contradictions in Quantum Mechanics
Physicists admit there is a contradiction in quantum mechanics. They say radiation exists both as particles and waves while admitting those are contradictions. Even though the two concepts contradict each other, physicists apply them both to light.
One of the reasons for assuming radiation is like a particle is that it imparts energy to orbiting electrons in large leaps. Electrons which orbit nuclei will only increase their energy in stages, as they jump from one "orbital" to another. It looked like a packet of energy was needed to cause that result.
The radiation which imparts energy to orbiting electrons has to be just the right frequency. The assumption is that the reason why the frequency has to be just right is because there are different amounts of energy in each frequency, and a particle of energy seems to be required.
That isn't what happens. Particles have length, width and height; energy does not. The reason why the frequency has to be just right is because a wave must bump the electron on one side of its orbit only. If both sides are bumped, one effect will neutralize the other. When the frequency is just right, an electron can be bumped repeatedly, until it acquires enough energy to jump to a higher orbit. With repeated bumps, a lot of low energy waves will do the same thing as a few high energy waves, as long as the frequency is the same as the electron orbit frequency.
In not understanding what happens, the assumption is that there is always the same amount of energy at any frequency. The difference between low energy and high energy waves disappears, and only the frequency looks relevant. So the assumption is that only the frequency determines the energy of light waves.
In reality, a single wave does not have to have the same energy within it as the electron acquires. Just bump the electron enough times and a low energy wave will do the same thing as a high energy wave, as long as they are both the right frequency for the electron. The false packet (photon) contains however many waves that are required to produce a visible effect upon the electron—sometimes maybe 10 waves, and sometimes maybe 100 waves.
A major glaring contradiction which should nullify the whole concept of photons is that the energy of a photon does not get weaker as it travels farther from its starting point. Everyone knows light gets weaker the farther it travels. But photons do not. Their energy is determined by their frequency regardless of how far they are from the source.
Doesn't this contradiction scream out the answer? If the same thing happens with strong and weak radiation, wouldn't it take more waves with weak radiation to do the same thing as fewer waves with strong radiation?
In other words, there is no difference between strong and weak radiation in the photon concept. Yet physicists know in other contexts that radiation can be weak or strong. The photon concept indicates that the energy is determined by frequency only, which eliminates any difference between strong and weak radiation at any particular frequency.
Not resolving such contradictions moves the subject out of the science domain. Science does not exist until the contradictions are removed. The purpose of science is to produce reliable evidence for objective reality. Contradictions destroy the reliability.
How can physicists be so wrong with quantum mechanics and be such wizards on subjects such as relativity? Relativity is nonfalsifiable, because it is totally contrived. It is only the obscurity which makes it unquestionable fact. There are other areas in physics more visible to outside observers which show obvious contradictions. The nature of chemical energy is an example.
Petroleum and coal are called fossil fuels, because they supposedly originate with biological materials. That assumption seems strange, because biomass does not accumulate in such large quantities without decaying. The real proof that petroleum is not biological in its origins is in the chemistry.
Petroleum is called hydrocarbon because of hydrogen attached to carbon. Hydrogen-carbon bonds are very high in energy. Biological material has oxygen with it, called carbohydrate, which has less chemical energy.
There is no way to increase chemical energy other than radiation. (ATP and similar reactions do not increase energy; they transfers energy with some loss.) Heat and pressure will not increase chemical energy, because they act upon nuclei, while chemical energy is in electrons which spin around nuclei. There is nothing that can be done to nuclei which will increase the motion of electrons which spin around them short of a nuclear reaction. (All chemical reactions go down-hill energetically with some energy loss as heat. There is not a one which does not lose energy apart from photochemical reactions.)
It means so-called fossil fuels did not originate with biological materials, because they were not exposed to light in a way which would increase the chemical energy from carbohydrates to hydrocarbons.
Physicists do something similar in the study of ATP. Several rotating proteins have been found in the mechanism for energizing the chemical energy carrier, ATP, through respiration. Biophysicists said that "binding force" and motion transfer energy from the rotating proteins to the ATP precursor. They assume chemical energy is derived from the kinetic energy of force and motion. Kinetic energy cannot be transformed into chemical energy; only radiant energy can.