Plank's constant is quantised BULLSHIT- just like Einstein's photon which is based on it

[mariuslvasile]

What in the bloody hell wave as we caused here?

amplitude is..[znip].. the energy of the wave which is directly proportional with the square of its amplitude ?

2. If amplitude does not exist, then the wave does not exist.

And we've completely gone into never never land.

I did not say that amplitude is...the energy of the wave. You are misquoting me by fragmenting the post making it unintelligible, and I dont understand what's the point of this.
This is my original post:

1. If amplitude is not important, then why would every physics book say it is, as it amplifies the energy of the wave which is directly proportional with the square of its amplitude ?

[mariuslvasile]

But, if Planck was correct that amplitude is not needed, then that shows that whatever it is that he is talking about (& i say that he is talking about photons)(whether he knows it or knot) is not a wave (ergo: photons are not waves).

But he was clearly talking about EM waves, which shows he was just stupid because to think of a wave without amplitude is just stupid.

And if aether exists, then light is a wave in the aether and it makes no sense to think of it as a particle.
The aether is the medium for light WAVES, it has nothing to do with light particles aka photons.
I think you are the only one who combines them and I dont understand why would you do that. Especially since you seem to oppose einstein's physics, and want the aether to return, but on the other hand you cling on to the very concept which made the aether leave- which is the photon.

[crawler]

But, if Planck was correct that amplitude is not needed, then that shows that whatever it is that he is talking about (& i say that he is talking about photons)(whether he knows it or knot) is not a wave (ergo: photons are not waves).

But he was clearly talking about EM waves, which shows he was just stupid because to think of a wave without amplitude is just stupid.

And if aether exists, then light is a wave in the aether and it makes no sense to think of it as a particle.
The aether is the medium for light WAVES, it has nothing to do with light particles aka photons.
I think you are the only one who combines them and I dont understand why would you do that. Especially since you seem to oppose einstein's physics, and want the aether to return, but on the other hand you cling on to the very concept which made the aether leave- which is the photon.

(1) Light might be a wave in/of the aether.
(2) Light might be a particle, needing zero aether.
(3) Light might be a particle in/of the aether.
I go for (3). The photon/particle being a peculiar thing. It is moreso a non-thing. It is (partly) a hole in the aether, where aether is annihilated. A photon has a certain length, but an infinite width.

[Jaaanosik]

There are experiments, for example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave_pack ... scattering
Whatever photons are, their models need to explain experiments.

[mariuslvasile]

Planks blackbody equation might be right only for blackbody radiation, where ambient light goes in a blackbox through a tiny hole and gets absorbed and reemmited by the blackbody material, and this process happens many times until it gets out. So probably all light that gets out of that stupid blackbox has the same amplitude and thats why that constant h appears.

But it is wrong to attribute it to EM waves in general, because its illogical to assume every EM wave is emmited by a blackbody through a tiny hole, and because it has no amplitude. And energy is proportional with the amplitude squared.