Introduction

What if particles are just wave packets? This is an alternative approach to particle physics.

This is not a complete theory, yet, but it describes the intuitive view I have about the EM field and matter. It is not established physics but speculation. It might be total nonsense, but maybe it holds a grain of truth.

The EM Field

Usually the electric and the magnetic fields are seen as two separate things that are somehow connected with each other. I think this separation should not be done, instead it’s just one EM field with the electric and magnetic effects being different manifestations of that single field. Maxwell saw the electromagnetic field as a field of quaternions. That’s a very interesting perspective. I know quaternions form my game development background, and they are used to describe rotations. A quaternion is the combination of a scalar and a vector, it could be described as the vector given the axis for the rotation and scalar the amount of rotation around that axis. “Rotate this much around this axis!”. The four-potential description of the EM field is very similar, using a scalar for the electric potential and a vector for the magnetic field. So, the electric field is like pure energy while the vector field of the magnetic field is structure! The magnetic field is what directs the energy flow, what creates shape and curls and form. 

I think that this interconnectness can create the non-linear effects required to create stable wave packets and wave configurations. 

Photon – Electron interactions

When light hits a photographic plate or any other form of light sensor, we can measure it as a distinct energy packet, as small dots or clicks. If light is just a wave, why do we get these non-continuous measurements?

What is measurement?

We tend to see measurement as something that can be applied without changing the object we measure. And often that’s the intention, why should I measure something when the result is immediately changed or even invalidated by the process? But in the underlying physics, there is no such thing as pure measurement. To get information about the thing we want to examine, we have to redirect some of its energy towards us. To measure the voltage of a battery, we have to connect a tiny electrical consumer and observe the effects of the applied electricity. When our measuring device is sensitive enough, this should not stress the battery too much, but if we just connect a light bulb, it might buckle under the load. 

How can we measure light? Somewhere, an electron has to be kicked out of its orbit, into another energy level, or even to rip apart a molecule bound. The substrate of the photographic plate is changed on a molecular level to create a dot. In our eyes, the light creates a small chemical effect that cascades into an electrical nerve signal towards the brain.

This interaction between light and electron has to happen somewhere. There has to be at least one electron to be affected, there is nothing below that limit, you cannot change half a molecule. This is a quantized effect. The smallest possible change a photon can create is to change an electron into its next possible energy level, and these energy levels are also quantized, with no valid states between. 

Even if light is in fact not a particle but a wave with size and extension, the changes we observe are always located in singular spots, or dots, or clicks or electrons that got modified.

But here comes another interesting aspect: Light is created by electrons falling down into a lower energy level! The very process that “makes” light is a quantized effect by itself. This quantized packet of electromagnetic energy, that carries the energy the electron has lost, is a photon. Photons can have different wave lengths, and the energy content of a photon is directly proportional to its wavelength, but there is always at least one whole photon. 

What is the shape of a photon? That’s the question. The particle view sees the photons as point-like, but I prefer to see it as a wave packet. A wavelet. A soliton wave traveling through the EM field. 

Erwin Schrödinger was also a strong proponent of this wavelet theory. In his mind, there was no wave-particle duality which is either or. Photons are always waves, but they are wave packets, wavelets, not just dispersing EM waves. And I agree. I think a photon is not either a wave or a particle, and depending on what you measure you get one result or the other, and the photon has to “decide” what it wants to be. That’s how the wave-particle duality is often described, that you have both properties, but mutually exclusive. No, it’s both. All the time. It’s a wave, but it’s also a small package of energy. Traveling in a straight line, as a particle would, but also with wave-like dimensions and properties.

How big is such a wavelet? Also a good question. Speculation: I assume it’s exactly one wavelength, maybe a little bit more. And in the case of visible light, a single wavelength is enough to fit in a few thousand atoms. 

How come that we still get singular dots on our photo plate? Because this is where the energy happened to be concentrated enough to cause an effect. This is where the core of the wavelet happened to overlap precisely enough to transfer its energy into the electron. And since creation and absorption of photons are complementary processes, this absorption creates a counter wave in the EM field that completely annihilates the photon wavelet.

The Core Hypothesis

Particles are not fundamental point-like objects. They are stable, self-sustaining configurations of the electromagnetic field – wavelets or solitons.

Supporting Observations

Mass and Energy are not different things, they are one and the same in a different shape. Pair production and annihilation of electron-positron pairs shows that energy (of photons) and particles are convertible into each other.

– E = mc²: Mass *is* energy. 511 keV confined in a stable configuration *would* have electron mass.
– Pair production: γ → e⁺ + e⁻ (pure field → two “particles”)
– Pair annihilation: e⁺ + e⁻ → 2γ (particles → pure field)
– The boundary between “particle” and “field” is already blurry in known physics.

Conceptual Summary

Standard View	Geometric Field View
Particles are fundamental point-like objects	Particles are stable field configurations (solitons/wavelets)
Mass and energy are related by E=mc²	Mass IS confined field energy; pair production shows continuity
Wave-particle duality is mysterious	Always waves; particle behavior emerges from field topology
Measurement causes wave collapse	Measurement is threshold-based field interaction
E and B are separate coupled fields	Unified EM field: Q = φ + A (quaternion structure)
Speed of light c is fundamental	c emerges from field properties: c = 1/√(ε₀μ₀)