We know that the brightness of the screen is related to the number of photons falling on the screen. Strictly speaking, the brightness of the screen gradually darkens around the intersection of light perpendicular to the screen and the screen. But this change is by no means accidental. The proof is as follows: put S 1 in the center of a sphere with a radius of R 1, assuming that S 1 emits n photons in a unit time, the number of photons accepted per unit sphere area is equal to the number of photons n divided by the total sphere area of 4πR 12. If the radius of the sphere changes from R 1 to R2 (R2 > R 12), the number of photons received per unit sphere area becomes n divided by 4πR22. Since R2 is greater than R 1, the number of photons received by a sphere with radius of R 1 per unit sphere area is greater than that of an R2 sphere. This is why the brightness on the screen gradually changes from bright to dark. When the distance between the screen and the light source is large and the area of the screen is small, it can be approximately considered that the photons on the screen are evenly distributed.

Now another coherent light source S2 is placed near S 1, and the situation has changed. On the plane perpendicular to the two light sources, there is a circle with alternating light and dark, and on the plane parallel to the two light sources, there is a fringe with alternating light and dark, as shown in figure 1, which is what people call the interference fringe of light. Because interference is the most important feature of fluctuation, it becomes one of the most powerful evidences of light fluctuation. We know that mechanical wave is the propagation of vibration in medium. When there are two coherent wave sources, the vibration of any point in the medium is the superposition of two waves when they arrive at that point respectively. When the phases of the two waves reaching this point are the same, the amplitude of this point is the largest. If the phase difference between the two waves is 1800, the vibration amplitudes will cancel each other, thus forming regular interference fringes. Classical optics uses mechanical waves to prove the interference fringes of light, but the medium ether that propagates light has been proved not to exist, so it is far-fetched to prove the interference fringes of light with mechanical waves. Quantum mechanics explains interference fringes by probability wave method, and holds that bright places are places with more photon opportunities and dark places are places with less photon opportunities. The problem is that when there is only one light source, photons are evenly distributed on the screen, and when there is another coherent light source, according to quantum theory, photons will concentrate in some places and will not go to other places, and the explanation of probability is unconvincing. Einstein once used God not to roll the dice to express his disgust at using probability to describe the behavior of a single particle. These are two orthodox explanations of the interference phenomenon of light at present. Are there any other factors that have not been taken into account in our understanding of the nature of light? Are there any other proof methods to unify the wave-particle duality of light, that is, to explain fluctuations and particles with a theoretical explanation?

In order to find this new theory, we have to make some necessary corrections on the basis of the existing optical quantum theory, that is, the energy of a single optical quantum is changing, the energy and mass of photons are transformed into each other, and the frequency of transformation is the frequency of light. Fast-frequency photons have large energy and small mass. On the contrary, photons with slow frequency have small energy and large mass, so that the distance traveled by photons in space forms a wave-like trajectory. Before demonstrating the interference phenomenon of light, let's define the light source. Single-frequency light source-The frequency is single, and all photons leave the light source in the same state (phase). Single-frequency light source has two characteristics. One is that it is at a certain spatial position from the light source, and the state of photons does not change with time. The state of the second photon changes periodically with the distance from the point light source. The wavelength of light refers to the distance that photons travel in space in a period of time.

We set two point light sources S 1 and S2 on the X axis, as shown in the figure 1. Let P be a point on the vertical plane, and the optical path differences PS 1-PS2 and S2 from P to S 1 are positive multiples of the wavelength (m = 1, 2, 3, ...). The two columns of photons starting from S1and S2 will reach point P in the same phase and state. Let q be another point on the vertical plane, and the optical path difference from q to S 1 and S2 is also ml. Make a curve passing through point P and point Q, so that the trajectory of all points in the vertical plane passing through XO on the curve has the property that the distance difference between any point on the curve and S 1 and S2 is constant. According to analytic geometry, we know that this curve is a hyperbola. If we imagine that this hyperbola rotates on the axis of a straight line XO, we will sweep out a surface called hyperboloid. We see that at any point on this plane, the photons from S 1 and S2 are always in the same phase (the phase difference is constant), the photon state of each point on the plane is certain, and the state of each point along the plane changes periodically. Because the wavelength of light is very short, the periodic change of this photon along the curved surface is not easy to observe.

In the same way, let t be another point on the vertical plane (not shown in the figure), and the optical path difference TS 1-TS2 from the point t to S 1 and S2 is l/2×(2m+ 1) times the wavelength (m = 1, 2,3, ...). Let V be another point on the vertical plane (not shown in the figure), and the optical path difference from V to S 1 and S2 is also l/2×(2m+ 1) times the length. Make a curve by T and V, so that any point on this curve is the difference between two fixed points S 1 and S2 constant. This curve is also a hyperbola, and rotation around XO will also sweep out a hyperboloid. The difference is that the phase difference between S 1 and S2 photons arriving at any point on this plane is always 1800, and the final state after superposition is a constant value.

The diagram 1 is drawn in the simple case that the distance from S 1 to S2 is 3l and the optical path difference of point P is PS 1-PS2=2l(m=2). The hyperbola of m= 1 is the locus of those points whose optical path difference is l on the vertical plane. The locus of each point with zero optical path difference (m=0) is a straight line passing through the midpoint of S 1S2. Its rotation around XO will be a plane. The hyperbola of m=-1 and m= -2 is also drawn in the figure. In this case, these five curves rotate around XO to generate five curved surfaces, which divide the energy field formed by two light sources S 1 and S2 into six infinitely extending energy spaces which are symmetrical left and right. Bright lines will appear on the screen at any position of those curves where the screen intersects the hyperboloid. If the distance between two light sources is many wavelengths, there will be many curved surfaces on which photons reinforce each other. Therefore, many hyperbolic (almost straight) interference fringes with alternating light and dark will be formed on the screen parallel to the connecting line of two light sources. On the screen perpendicular to the connecting line of two light sources, many circular interference fringes with alternating light and dark will be formed. The relationship between two adjacent bright stripes is that the optical path difference is L, and the difference between dark stripes and adjacent bright stripes is l/2. The phase change of interference fringes from bright to dark to bright is from in-phase to phase difference 1800 to in-phase.

In order to test whether the above hypothesis is correct, here I designed a simple experiment combining optical interference experiment and photoelectric effect experiment. The first step is to generate light and dark interference fringes with an optical interferometer. Step 2: Place the photovoltaic cells in different positions from bright to dark stripes in turn. Of course, the frequency of monochromatic light source should be above the threshold frequency, and the kinetic energy of photoelectrons should be observed. According to the existing optical quantum theory, the kinetic energy of photoelectrons should be constant, because the energy of photons is only related to the frequency of light, not to the brightness of light, and the frequency of light has not changed after interference, so the measured kinetic energy of photoelectrons should be constant on the stripes from light to dark. From the point of view of quantum theory, the probability of photons appearing in bright places is high, and the probability of photons appearing in dark places is low. Light and shade are only different in the number of photons per unit area, and the kinetic energy of photons has not changed, so the conclusion is that the kinetic energy of photoelectrons remains unchanged. My conclusion is that the number of photons on the interference fringes from bright to dark is the same, and the kinetic energy of the photoelectrons generated changes continuously from large to small.

If the experimental results are consistent with my inference, we might as well extend this conclusion to all physical particles, because physical particles also have wave-particle duality, that is, the energy and mass of all physical particles are constantly changing with each other, which is the objective reality image of micro-world particles described by quantum mechanical wave function.