Y can't we call light as particle moving in wave motion
the light is not a particle moving in wave motion . and this can be explained in a different manner given below.
Quantum fields can behave in ways that appear to be wave like, and they can also behave in ways that appear to be particle like, and this the origin of the claim that light is both a wave and a particle. It's more accurate to say that light can behave like both a wave and a particle.
Anyhow, as far as I know quantum fields can't behave like a wave and like a particle at the same time. Generally speaking they behave like waves when propagating and like particles when exchanging energy. So we can't have a wave of particles or a particle of waves. It's one or the other.
Incidentally, this applies to all particles and not just light.
it is explained below briefly.
We know ,E=mc2 (mass energy equivalence)
& E=hν [from Planck's equation]
Now , de Broglie thought that if
→ Energy is related to mass
→ Energy is related to frequency.
Then, there should be a mathematicall relationship between mass and frequency as well.
Why shouldn't there be?
All matter can exhibit wave-like behavior. For instance, a stream of electrons could be diffracted just like a light wave or a water wave. Matter waves are the bedrock of the theory of quantum mechanics, and this weird, irreconcilable ambiguous puzzle is referred to as the wave–particle duality. The concept that matter behaves like a wave is also referred to as the de Broglie hypothesis
The de Broglie wavelength is the wavelength, λ, associated with a massive particle and is related to its momentum, p, through the Planck constant, h:
⇒ mc2 = hcλ
⇒ mc = hλ
⇒ λ = hmv ⇒ λ = hp
This equation explain both wave as well as particle nature because both wavelenght and momentum is involved.
⇒Differaction → Explains wave nature
⇒Interference → Wave Nature
⇒Photoelectric effect → Particle nature
the light is not a particle moving in wave motion . and this can be explained in a different manner given below.
Quantum fields can behave in ways that appear to be wave like, and they can also behave in ways that appear to be particle like, and this the origin of the claim that light is both a wave and a particle. It's more accurate to say that light can behave like both a wave and a particle.
Anyhow, as far as I know quantum fields can't behave like a wave and like a particle at the same time. Generally speaking they behave like waves when propagating and like particles when exchanging energy. So we can't have a wave of particles or a particle of waves. It's one or the other.
Incidentally, this applies to all particles and not just light.
it is explained below briefly.
We know ,E=mc2 (mass energy equivalence)
& E=hν [from Planck's equation]
Now , de Broglie thought that if
→ Energy is related to mass
→ Energy is related to frequency.
Then, there should be a mathematicall relationship between mass and frequency as well.
Why shouldn't there be?
All matter can exhibit wave-like behavior. For instance, a stream of electrons could be diffracted just like a light wave or a water wave. Matter waves are the bedrock of the theory of quantum mechanics, and this weird, irreconcilable ambiguous puzzle is referred to as the wave–particle duality. The concept that matter behaves like a wave is also referred to as the de Broglie hypothesis
The de Broglie wavelength is the wavelength, λ, associated with a massive particle and is related to its momentum, p, through the Planck constant, h:
⇒ mc2 = hcλ
⇒ mc = hλ
⇒ λ = hmv ⇒ λ = hp
This equation explain both wave as well as particle nature because both wavelenght and momentum is involved.
⇒Differaction → Explains wave nature
⇒Interference → Wave Nature
⇒Photoelectric effect → Particle nature
