Light, what is it? the most up to date theories I have read claim that it is both a particle and a wave (wave/particle duality). How can something that obviously has a physical existance be two things? I agree that in certain situation light behaves as a photon and in others as an EM wave but why is there not one model of light that can predict both of these? I propose that they is. Since my theories are usually overly complex i'll summerise it here and if anyone is interested i can elaborate further. Light IS a partical, infact not just light but all electromagnetic radiation consists of photons. These photons are emitted by electrons when they change energy levels within an atom. For a photon to exist it must have mass (no matter how small) and it is generally accepted that photons have no charge. However, if a photon has no net charge but does have a positive and negative side to it, as the photon departs from the electron its possitive side would remain pointing towards the negative electron (only for a very short period of time). This would cause the photon to spin. The spin would be proportional to the magnitude of its charges which would be proportional to its mass. The frequency of a photon is also proportional to its mass so provided the proportionalities are the same (which can be shown if some basic assumptions are made) then the angular frequency of the photon is equal to its observed EM frequency. This can be used to explain how photons can be observed to behave like waves. it will take a particular distance for a photon to rotate through 360* (this is its wave length). If a pair of photons arrive at an atom facing opposite directions (ie, out of phase) then the one with possitive facing forewards would hit an electron, and the negative one would hit the nucleas, the effect of this is that the charge between the electron and nucleas is unchanged and therefor the electrons energy is unchanged and so no photon is re-emmited, this is observed as deconstructive interference. Started as a summary but went into a bit more detail (appologises for the tedium). Personally I cant see anything wrong with my theory, but i'm obviously biased so I would appreciate critisism (and praise if any is deserved) from anyone who is interested.