> Its not that simple, wireless.

I am sorry, but I try to simplify things and not complicate them!

> Its called particle-wave duality for a reason. Its behaves as both particle and wave.

I am sorry, but I am not a big fan of "duality"!

> Light itself can behave like particles with energy, thus E=hv. Argue with Einstein all
> you want. He won the Nobel prize in 1921 for this work.

I would, but he is dead now! Just because he won the Nobel prize does not make him God!

> Particles show wave-like behaviour, and light, according to Einstein, shows
> particle-like behaviour.

Well, I say that there are no particles to start with, so how can they behave like a wave if they don't exist!? Only waves behave like particles and not the other way around. Even electrons are known to be waves now...

> Have you ever heard of The Compton Effect? It serves as convincing evidence that light
> is made up of particles.

Yes, but I don't see that as ecidence of particles but rather of action/reaction...

> "Compton effect [for A. H. Compton], increase in the wavelengths of X rays and gamma
> rays when they collide with and are scattered from loosely bound electrons in matter.

That is just action/reaction which is essentially how all reality is programmed...

> This effect provides strong verification of the quantum theory since the theoretical
> explanation of the effect requires that one treat the X rays and gamma rays as particles
> or photons (quanta of energy) rather than as waves.

Why does it require that they be viewed as particles?

> The classical treatment of these rays as waves would predict no such effect.

Say what!? Encoded waves do interfere with each other because of the various harmonics...

> According to the quantum theory a photon can transfer part of its energy and linear
> momentum to a loosely bound electron in a collision.

Again, standard action/reaction...

> Since the energy and magnitude of linear momentum of a photon are proportional to its
> frequency, after the collision the photon has a lower frequency and thus a longer
> wavelength. The increase in the wavelength does not depend upon the wavelength of the
> incident rays or upon the target material.

Well, just because there is action/reaction going on and energy is being transferred from one wavelength to another does not mean that particles have to exist!

Energy transfers like this are going on "real time" all of the time! That is exactly what the Universe is all about when one looks at it from a frequency perspective vs. time.

> It depends only upon the angle that is formed between the incident and scattered rays.
> A larger scattering angle will yield a larger increase in wavelength. The effect was
> discovered in 1923. It is used in the study of electrons in matter and in the production
> of variable energy gamma-ray beams.

Indeed, the angles or the relative position of the various wave forces during action/reaction are very much critical for what the results of the action/reaction will be.

In summary, the compton effect does not make a photon a particle and it is just action/reaction or cause and effect. That is the more simple explanation which always wins simple the simplest answer is always the best answer...

-wirelessguru1