.... probably pronounced "soopreem reetardasion"

I don't know hot it can be so hard to understand, that wave or say "photon" have not the polarization of all angles at same time and thus two (entangled) photons have the 50% probability to go or not to go through polarizers adn thus mathc probability should be 50% average, but in my theory entangled photons have only one some certain polarization and both the same and thus average probability to match is not 0.5, but 0.6591549423395163 and according to current (oficial) theory match average proabbility is 0.818309759891477 from 0 to 45 degrees. hidden variables probably have average match probability some ~0.6 and thus my theory have bigger match probability than hidden variables and it so nicely matching with experiments

I think, that Bell quantum eraser can be at all only theoretical thing and nobody actualy make such experiemtn in working sense and here one more link http://grad.physics.sunysb.edu/~amarch/ .
But Some explanations in over case I can give. When there no polarizer for detecotr A (without two slits), then photons have bigger amplitude and double slit reflected fringers are overheaded by this stronger amplitude and when polarizer puted onto Detector A then from detector B reflected light going through double slits and creating interference patter in detector A, because now is twice weaker amplitude of photons, which going to detector A, but amplitude from Detector B radited photons interference is the same and thus then more chance to see interference pattern on detctor A and also this amplitude for detector A photons is important, because it increasing amplitude of reflected "fingers". But I need to see real experiment paper instead some pseudotheory...
But like I say, there no any theoretical limits for explaining Bell eraser and also maybe it even possible to show, that this my theory is right by don't spliting light and don't sending it to Detector A, but only do it when it reflected and send it not in circular phorm, but in linear... Everything is very simple, there even don't need to reflect from BBO crystal, becasue there seems, that there is beam spliter, which will do his work and then 25% interference in detector A theoreticaly no problem to see.
At all this entanglement is so ridiculouse, because in all experimetns it actualy created through beam spliter and then it efiecency should be 25%, because two photons can fly in 4 diferent way, but it is obviouse that there no any photons, but only waves. My theory is 100% right!

Some crayzy idea for atom model. Electromagnetic waves is exactly the same as waves on water, but only expanding like sphere, but have ampliture and so on. Water waves speed alsmost linarly and x times depending on wavelenght. WAve with 10 times bigger amplitude is 10 times longer and 10 times faster. So at all 10+10-10=10 times have more energy. So it's fit's with law h*f, but f there can be actualy speed of wave and amplitude, rather than frenquency. If two waves summed up then they speed increase and energy and wavelenght. Why shorter waves better difract possible explanation can be that they have bigger aplitude and inertion and energy and speed. This all combaining with relativistic my theory it's all still remains possible According to this theory bigger amplitude electromagnetic waves should difract diferently, but you see, that then amplitude is bigger, speed also and thus inertion also and somthing going on like wave is longer, but inertion bigger and this two things compensating each over and it's giving result, that all waves behave like they have the same wavelenght! For examing in same way atoms, need use relativistic theory... But there will be the same, but mabe later...

Okay, continuing idea about sea waves, I there have absolutly revolution theory about waves and atoms!
All waves are exactly like sea waves. Bigger amplitude waves have bigger speed proportional to amplitude like in sea waves. All waves have the same frenquency, but bigger waves are longer, but going faster and thus frenquency is the same of all waves, but longer going faster and have bigger amplitude, than shorter waves. Two times longer wave going faster 2 times and have 2 times bigger amplitude. Shorter amplitude waves better difracting, but faster and bigger amplitude wavse better difracting, because of bigger amplitude and speed and thus 2+2-2=2 times better difracting those waves, which have bigger amplitude and longer and faster!
Okay, so all waves have the same frenquency, but diferent speed and amplitude... So how we see colourse if all waves have the same frenquency? Well, this is most interesting part. If say there is red rose then our brains comparing does there is bigger amplitude waves detected in nearest eyes detection point, then if there no bigger amplitude, then there means, tath coloure is red. IF there is another bigger amplitude (smaller and little bigger), then it's means, that coloure is green and red and our eyes detecting both colourse if there is another bigger amplitude waves in nearest point (like RGB) then there we see white coloure of blue green and red.
If there is only biggest amplitude waves then we see blue. Particularly this explain why hoter stars radiating more blue waves, because there added many small ampltudes and becoming more high amplitude waves - blue... I am not now only sure how added big waves with big frenquency waves, probably if frenquency is close to each voer then they can constructivly creat bigger wave and if frenquencies are prety far from each over then they flying like two frenquency waves. (damn, I there was talking about amplitudes and not frenquencies, becasue frenquencies are the same) Ah, how to recognise that it is blue or red if it have same amplitude/frenquency? Well, blue can be only if there is smaller amplitude green and red waves, but they must be realy small and if they are bit higher amplitude then there is white. To radiate only blue waves from many atoms there is they sumation untill they have same amplitude and then they holding the same amplitude in closed space... So how there can fly both amplitude waves like red, and blue. So don't need frenquencies to explain current coulours theory. And officlia coloure theory is wrong then. So now we 100 years working with wrong colourse theory.
Why waves is not like waves in air or water or matter like iron? Because on water waves are mechanical and in water or in air or in wood waves are not meachanical, but springer type, because molecules can move in one or in over direction by makin spring effect and this explains why all frenquency waves in air moving with same speed. For example in air waves traveling faster if air is hotter, because molecules traveling faster from one to another. In water waves aren't like springs and are mechanical like in my smallest spheres theory, where no place for spings (effects) and over things, becaue they already are in maximal density.

There need also rethink many things about atoms and colourse, but I think this theory is right. Atoms and electrons absorbing waves like some plastical water or somthing filled balls and thus actualy there no any absorbtion, but only vibration of all matter. And of course if this ball moving on water surface then it radiating waves, exactly in same way as charged particles like electrons. Who know, maybe neutron also radiating waves, but just imposible to check it?

Okay, some astronoms, may disagree with me and to say, that then some blue waves must to reach faster us than red waves, by factor of 2 times and farther stars must reach us after longer time and this is true, but they forgoting one small niuanse, that we flying at speed 0.9999999999999999999c and such distance is, that's right, farther stars reaching after longer time But sciencists will say, that farhter stars, but brighter must reach faster us than darker stars. Well, maybe exaclty this process going on. But there is small nuanse, that with bigger amplitude waves need longer time to excide atome to detect them. And you want to change those big amplitude waves into small amplitude waves (and to detect them) then nothing will work, because such conversions imposible, maybe you see small difraction, but this is not decrease amplitude of wave almost, but will need more such waves to registre it...
At least now I don't see any limits of imposibility of such briliant 100% new theory about electromagnetic waves. Does you see?

So if bigger amplitude wavse can travel faster, then it means, that speed of light is not a limit and speed of electron also can't be limited, but just there is limit of energy and this particluarly means, that no any realtivity at all, but just is law according which need some energy to move. If you have very much energy, then you can travel at very big speed (maybe lenght decreasing in relativity means, particle distance increasing?..), but at bigger speed... Boring. But right..
Let's better talk about gravity speed. Gravity speed is also then bigger if object is bigger. Also coloumb force speed is bigger if cahrge is bigger. But this almost don't changing nothing, except revolution! This explains how possible that rotates about universe center so many galaxies without dialtion and in tackt...
There come new era of physics, DavidD physics

OK, here is principle of realativity.
Particle moving with accelration radiating electromagnetic waves. Bigger acceleration, bigger amplitude waves radiated (and they going faster and are longer). So if you at 0.99c particle accelerate to bigger speed, then it radaite bigger waves and need more and more energy for particle to accelerate it. Theoreticaly it is possible to accelerate particle to infinity speed, but such acceleration or will be infinity long or need infinity energy. Because we don't have very match energy on earth and universe, then limit for us is not speed of acceleration, but energy limit. And we connecting in all our civilization on earth energy limit with speed limit, but this is wrong. This is actualy only energy limit. And since particles itself have very mach energy then we thinking, that the can move accordint to newton laws, because we have many energy (and this energy used not linarly, but smaller) and our particles radianting small waves, then we thinking, that there is newtons laws and no relativity. It's very easy to compare this efect with car driving. Untill we going on small speed, we thinking, that there is newtons laws, but when we going on 300 km/h speed or 500 km/h speed, then we see, that energy increase like in relativistic speed twice and more because of air restriction (and maybe over friction). But if we turn off engine then car will stop, but in relativity our world this don't hapening, because between smallest spehere no friction like is friction between air and car...

Ok, there is important point in my theory. Since like showing my theory about don't existation of entanglement, that each waves, when it is produced have some polarization. So it's explains like 'sea electromagnetic waves' can travel with diferent amplitudes and speeds and lenghts. Simple! Some of them have one polarization and some over and thus no disapearing of small waves when they combined.
I have no doubt, that my this theory about sea waves is right! There no many frenquencies waves like in current maxwell shmaxewll model and like curent borh model. Just some atoms better than over absorbing waves! There no quantization of waves! No quantization of atom radiation!!! Helium (I mean hydrogen) atom just radiating weaker waves, which weaker difracting!!! depending on orbit... Current atom theory is completly wrong!!! Current colourse theory is also completly wrong! Nature acting much more "digital" than we think and much more simple!!! There no diferent frenquencies and any oevr shitshits. But only longer and faster and bigger amplitude waves better difracting (I am 100% sure, that in water in small gap longer wave will better difract than shorter!). Because longer waves have like smaller obstacle and thus better difracting than small er waves! You see all is match!!!!!!!!!! Damn it. There don't exist solid matter! But only plazma! All mater is plazma! Electrons falling into nuclears and radiating electromagnetic waves. Different atoms radiating diferent amplitude waves (longer or shorter / faster or slower), which in same amount can be understooded as different energy waves, but since longer 'sea" waves better difracting then sciencists missleadingly interpretate/understood it as more powerfull and shorter wavelenght waves. But this is wrong. They actualy are longer and more powerfull. My smallest ball theory predicting realy fantastic things. I don't know what to say more, my theory predicting everything the same as current theory, but match with smallest balls theory. Schrodinger equation of course is wrong, but only have some good stuff of average distance and electrons configurations, because of coloumb force, which describing properties of atoms, but this is roughly model and natural model is more chaotic, but on the over hand since there is long time and relativity and many time to spread to all waves equaly then maybe those electrons holdings on some average distance, but still some of them must fall into nuclears and produce neutrons, which we frenquency see as proton/neutron transformations to each over. Then by spin or some over reasons neutron decaying into proton and electron and electron kinetic energy is radiated into orbit of atom and story begins again. Proton is not radiated because is traped between over protons, which holds toghether with spins and thus possible that smaller nuclears more frenquently radiating protons, but on the over hand bigger nuclears have more them... But proton still then fuse with electron and neutron then by spin force fuse with nuclear and so no escape is possible from atom to proton or electron or neutron.
I would say, that go farther than atom and to search quarks or somthing is not real, because there almost imposible to understood processes in atom. And to modelate some protein folding, which probably don't exist is apogey of stupidity. Proteins folds by average size limitations of some cell value or somthing. If you put thread(snacke) into water and it will folds, but protein folds inside water... But imagine that you put thread in very small value of water then it is folded and to unfold it, well, to unfold it is almost imposible and need bigger value. some disease may be because protein making loop and knot and this protein probably must die, but if it is strong then it cousing deasies maybe... Some proteins may misfold because they are wrong proteins and have wrong structure and cells mading wrong proteins with errors. This is then cell problem or even cell or DNA mutation, for DNA mutation according to my theory there no any limits and it can mutate very well from not very linar absorbtion of waves (waves disbalance). But it is good when cells becoming mutated, but they dieing and this probably going on in everybody and many cells daying because of mutations, but they replaced with new cells. But problem probably is when cell mutating and not dieing but reproducing wrong cells, and this wrong cells even making infaction to good cells, which is less possible or maybe imposible at all, but says, that most viruses infecting cells DNA with they DNA, but does realy sombody see such process? I suggesting, that virus just killing cell with it molecular structure like chemical. So worst thing in cancer probably is when mutated cell reproducing itself and eating and living like normal cell (like most current string and quantum sciencists). Then this cell if don't dieing faster and if reproducing faster than such type of cells becoming dominating and then becoming cancer, but such conciousnes is not very spreaded and most times we all have cancer cell, but they dieing, I think... In human brain, hm, in human brain cells dieng, but they can live long time, hm, but there is theories seems, that in brain cells also repducings and I more tend to agree with such theories, because to live very longly for one cell is too much, except maybe some glue cells very carefully geting food to them and so on. But still I think, that there is reproduction of brain cells as fast as they dieing. But it's mean, that axons also dieing because they are cells too. Well, this is but, since reproduced cells are in very limited place, when heh, where they can go? Not very far, huh? So they replaecing died cells in same place and roughly in same connections, but since cells dieing not very fast probably then total information aligining new cells to act like died cell, of course roughly, but for this is many axons for errors correction. But maybe this need to leave more for biologist, who probably don't sow through microscope how realy acting one brain cell -neuron. Neuron szie is about 100-1000 nm and he leaving probably from hour to waek or mount. So scincists bothering to wait so long and to watch so long at one neuron, because from sciencists wathcing he can die...

Okay, why we don't see x rays or gamma rays? Well, one possible answer is that those waves 'photons' is not many, I mean there is high amplitude waves, but they are only of few polarizations instead like in visible rays many polarizations waves at same time. But as you correctly guesing, that gamma rays amplitude decreasing by r^2 and thus gamma rays sooner or latter will become conventional rays, but since they still have bigger amplitude in contrast with over waves then they by sciencists are detected as gamma rays instead visible or infrared waves. So actualy gamma rays after distance of say 100 km is somthing like visible rays! So gamma rays can't kill from cosmos or from sun, but actualy sun radiating big amplitude waves, which can eat skin and so on.
Now there somthing about polarization. If there flying many waves then possible that only small amount of waves becoming polarizer or in over words coming through and over is or reflected or aborbed and becoming like thermal waves, whatever... But according to my theory if there flying polarized produced wave, then it can go through with amplitude (cosx)^2. And there becmoing polarized wave projection onto possiblity to go through with some apmlitude... And if there is many polarized waves then they average possiblity to go through or more rpecisly they average amplitude will be (cos45)^2 or twice smaller. But diference between x rays and ligh probably is such, that light have more waves polarized at diferent angles, but amplitude is not counted and thus weaker, but in x rays there is less angles, because they was created artificialy and thus they amplitude is bigger and thus they can act in diverent over way and to be in rengen bones analizers. Or maybe even possible, that x-rays don't exist, but there is electrons rays, because like I know electrons can go through paper, but can't go through book, but can go through human body. Where is evidence, that x-rays is not reflected electrons? They have very big energy and thus they probably will not be seen in vilson camera, because they moving too fast and thus interacting too weakly. So actualy I more tend to think, that x-rays is electrons! At all according to my theory like I say after some little bit bigger distance gamma rays becoming usual visible rays. There is dangerouse only uranium deacay nuclears etc or neutrons radiation. But I still explain how x-rays still can exist, but then they dangerous (amplitude and lenght and speed) proportional to distance to them. But still I think that it is probably electrons. Also possible that when uranium devides there no radiation of gamma rays, but only kinetic energy of atoms and neutrons. Since seems, that there can be infinity orn very much diferent angles of polariations of many waves then seems, that there is diference between bigger amplitude waves and smaller. By the way, if there was many waves of diferent amplitude and if you polarize them then seems, that they have total bigger amplitude and they can become somthing like gamma or x-rays (but with one polarization). But there probably still everything depending on how much energy can absorb atom don't matter or it polarizet longer waves or not polarized shorter and slower waves (yes in my theory longer waves is more powerfull).
Ok, what is lazer? Well, it's just many waves sumation and going them through very small hole, that's all! Waves there can be polarized or somthing, but they must be in same direction, becouse going from one hole and possible that either very match amplitudes polariztions fits into one wave or increasing amplitude of wave or two processes at same time. So blue ray must radiate few amplitudes waves from biggest to smaller and green also, or green only one amplitude and red weak amplitude and almost a little bit higher. There no problems with this.
Some can see that in my theory there can be many waves of diferent polarization within one waves and can say, that if there will be more wave then they amplitude still increase because some can match and yes maybe, because is limited number of polarizations, because there no infinity small balls (maybe is?), but they can't no match, because of some diferent radiation but it's seems not likely, so maybe they sometimes match, but this seems, don't debunking my theory. Everything is ok with my theory.
At least now nobody will scare of gamma rays at big distance

Ok now radio crancks may wonder why radio waves of some certain frenquency working properly? Well, waves have some amplitude, which after distance decreasing, but here probably is realy such thing like frenquency, because longer waves traveling faster then if they amplitude becoming smaller then they speed decreasing but frenquency remaining the same. So radio waves is acceleration of electrons and deaceleration and then aceleration in oposit direction, thus it means, that electrons until acelerating in one direction, then radio wave amplitude increasing and if in over direction then radiowave amplitude decreasing and then again increasing with oposit sign and so on, you know this stuff, somthing like this. So radiowaves actualy have frenquency unlike maybe(?) over waves. But over waves is of course like sea waves, but they may have frenquency depending how long electron flying and deacelerating... But in visible waves there is everything so haotic that there actualy don't play any role frenquency, but only amplitude. But who know maybe there is some electrons falling into nuclears frenquency in some atoms slower in some faster then radiated. Maybe then my theory is wrong, but bigger amplitude waves still must fly faster. But maybe my theory is good even for radio waves because imposible to create diferent frenquency waves with diferent amplitude (unless they ahve diferent polarization or somthing...?). But how about this: in bigger frenquency there radiated bigger amplitude waves and at smaller frequency smaller amplitude. Those bigger amplitude waves vibrating faster electrons and thus electrons moving faster and smaller frenquency slower and electrons move slower and this electrons current is configurated and you hear in radio music... But some radio cranck can say, that then longer and bigger amplitude waves must come faster and to make all electrons vibrations faster before small amplitude waves. Yes, but they seems, that longer to accelerate electrons or simply it's distance is so small and this waves speed is unknow then this is almost no diference... And usualy in radios there used not frenquency diference, but amplitude diference like in AM (amplitude modulation) and unlike in FM (frenquency modulation). So my theory perfectly explains AM radio. Possible that frenquency radio working in this way: frenquency is decreased and increased and it's like bits and amplitude of wave, so then all amtch with my theory, bigger frenquency radiowaves becoming faster waves and more accelerating electrons and making biger curent and smaller frenquency radio waves going slower, but since speed diference is very small maybe 2 times or even smaller (many radios in 88-108 MHz) then speed of waves almost don't have impact and that's it don't used on low frenquencies possible and distance is small so it's almost don't have diference and bigger amplitude waves longer possible accelrating, because distance between then is bigger and they are longer so all fit with my theory!

In my textbook writen, that photoefect fully or mostly depdning on frenquency and not on light intensity. So I suggesting experiment, that hos possible to increase "frenquency". Need to pass light through polarizer and then total amplitude ( at one polarized angle) will increase and such amplitude maybe is more useful for photoefect, but also possible that even polarizer not perfectly aligning all waves according to some angle, because orentation of electrons in polarizer is not very perfect... But need to try pass light through polarizer if my textbook don't claiming nonsense...

And BTW, longer (my) waves from farther stars don't flying faster, because they are much longer and need much more time to absorb them. So everything match. My new theory is perfect.

for photoefect longer my waves can be more usefull, because they maybe longer accelerating electron in one direction and thus it can better use kinetic energy...

Okay, according to my new theory about gravity, the photoefect is actualy electrons radiation! Photoefect making not wwaves, but electrons! It's explains why photoefect so bad through glass, because glass absorbing electrons. X-rays also electrons reflection. So our sun radiating very much electrons or protons, which are very accelerated to c, because sun have charge and this charge actualy is gravity. So sun emiting electrons or protons when neutron decaying on sun surface then thos particles are pushed from sun and reaching very big speed that can go thorugh atomosfere and weakly through glass. So photoefect is electrons radiation and x ray doing the same. Ultraviolet light is actualy electrons (or protons)! And x yray is 99% electrons. Nobody doing photoefect with gamma rays huh? Solarium light probably is also weak electrons. All mysteries is solved. And gamma rays may don't exist at all.

Edit: at all any light radiating electrons and thus photoefect is pure depending on electrons! Hotter object radiating more electrons (or neutrons or protons). So it's explains why "blue light" making better photoefect, because blue waves or creating more energetic electrons or just blur light radiating objects are hotter and more there is fussion with nuclears electrons and then decaying neutrons into protons and electrons, whcih probably and making photoefect.
So light and any over radiation don't making photoefect! Becasue all waves spreading probably equaly..

Edit2: possible that light pressure of sun 4/10^8 N/m^2 is actualy pressure of electrons from sun! Thus fromula h*f don't have any real implimetations.
edit3: or since one side was mirrored and one black when was measured pressure then possible that pressure of sun 4*10^-8 N/m^2 is actual energy of waves and light and is not such formula like E=h*f if photoefect is fake (electrons or protons).

So I think that light pressure (if not electrons ) is 4*10^-8 N/m^2 of sun and this is actual energy of light and formula E=h*f is wrong and thus formula E=m*c^2 is also wrong. E=m - this is right formula! mc^2 don't have any sense and nothing will change if c^2 will be removed it just stupidity. It's nothing saying. Some stupid constant, which don't mean anything and don't have any sense. So such light energy is enough to excide retina I think and it don't doing any photoefect and this stuf doing electrons and electron difraction don';t exist it just simply scatering over protons or atoms... Light energy depending on amplitude, not very hot objects we don't see because amplitude is too small to excide retina. And hotter objects is red, because there no another smaller waves, which could be detected as red and then biggest waves as blue, but no, because over light is too weak and possible that for blue light need not only big amplitude but big single polarized amplitude...

edit: On the over hand c^2 making sense, but whatever... Photoefect of gamma or x rays or UV rays is reflected electrons, which then atracted by anode probably...
So possible model, that faster waves don't fussing (because of diferent polarizations angles) with slower waves and thus there is separation between faster waves and slower waves and it is then exactly the same as in official current theory waves energy and frenquencies. If there is radiated in one spot of 3 colourse in eye weak blue and strong red and then blue will be like red then it will be red. And if there will not be radiated weak blue, but only red and weak red then it will be understooded like red. I think the key is, that accordint to hot body radiation the radition can depend exponentionaly and if amplitudes depending linarly then it means, that this is red blue and green. Or simply we don't see weaker amplitude than red even at night, this explains why we red don't see as blue or possible that at all infrared rays don't have very weak amplitude and maybe at all infrared light is electrons or visible light, but which is visible only for cameras and not for human, because infrared waves can't have big amplitude according to my theory, because then they will be visible, except of polarization... So possible, that infrared light is also electrons and cameras detections nothing have to do with inrared light. Becuase any stronger infrared light becmoing visible (except that many polarized amplitudes wit in one disk)... Or like flame is blue and it is bigger amplitude and thus bigger energy, but seems, that according to presure law light energy is small and seems, that there mose possible that electrons it is energy and not waves and so better don't take electrons radiation, but whait untill electrons molecuels motions will reach you without electrons...

E=m cannot possibly work. The units of energy are Joules, the units of mass are kilograms.

Joules does not equal kilograms.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimensional_analysis

Okay possible theory, why blue amplitude remaining blue. Because there is bigger amplitude in one polarization waves, which we call UV rays and which we don't see if they are not expanded and with loosed amplitude. So for example in young double slit experiment there coming many amplitudes waves and then we see only higger blue and visible, which before was invisible UV rays. And this means, that atoms somehow absorbing only bigger or smaller amplitude waves and not many smalls but with random polarization and polarizers actualy don't increasing amplitude of waves, because either those amplitudes interference or they are still on very small angle separated from each over. I more tend to think, that they are separated at very small angle, but if them are very much then they possible can fuse into one big amplitude... For example green grass better reflecting one amplitudes than over don't matter how ridiculouse it sounds No, maybe realy there is diferent frenquencies waves. on water surface things maybe is diferent because there is gravity... Or need to see does in young experiment there is diferent results with smaller and bigger amplitude waves. Or colourse we realy understand depending how much is diference between amplitudes. But how to explain green grass radiation when absorbed white? Maybe grass atoms absrobing some amplitudes wavse and then radiating more bigger amplitude and less smaller amplitude diferent contrast? Maybe. So it seems, that from two variables frenquency and amplitude there possible to explain all colourse and everything only with one variable - amplitude... Possible that infrored radiation is realy weak visible light and if somebody claims that have big amplitude infrared waves then it's only possible if those waves is in many diferent polarizations. IF there coming many infrared in room then they possible don't decrease or visible light becoming them...

Now more hypothetical part...
Earth inside is charged positivly and this atoms inside earth or plazma have small density, but it hodling electrons. Earth surface possible charged negativly. Thus sund is atractive like by gravity. Or maybe there at all inside earth is some layers of charge, but total layers charge is positive or negative. Sun is also positive or nergative or with layers. Possible that sun is positive and earth surface negative and thus earth is atracted by sun. Possible that galaxies centers are negative and planets positive... Possible, that sun radiating electrons to earth surface, which can be UV rays.
This charge theory possible explains "dark energy" and "dark matter". Because charge is harder predict in each massive object like star, because it nothing have to do with mass, then can be some miscalculations and thus this tends to think about "dark nonsense"...

My waves theory, that all waves is waves like in sea and all waves have the same frenquency, but diferent speed and amplitude (bigger amplitude - bigger speed and wavelenght) predicts, that some galaxies of universe can be missunderstoodly understooded, that universe expanding faster than light, because there can be detected some misinterpretated redshift, which can be weak amplitude and disbalance in my theory, that weaker amplitude have shorter lenght... Also there is some measurments, that in matter there is loosing waves "frenquency" (according to official theory) - becmoing "longer". But this can be because matter not linarly retriving/;retransmiting waves, because of atoms/electrons structure and configuration... (even vacum have some small amount of atoms).

So according to my theory there need be very careful, when talking about redshift...

My theory correctly predicinging that "bigger frenquency photons" better difracting because they are actualy longer waves and "smaller frenquency photons" difracting not so much, becuase they actualy are shorter and slower waves... So this is exactly like in sea/water waves and in current oficial theory everything is oposit and wrong...

More corrections into electrodynamic...
Electromagnetic waves don't exist. This is misunderstanding and there no any prove electroMagnetic waves... There is just waves, which have energy like water waves. And not only charged particles radiating this waves, but also neutrons, when they flying with acceleration, but since neutrons don't have charge and can't be accelerated to big speed and is hard detected then nobody can hold them and see, does they radiating or not radiating waves, when moving. So acctauly possible that lorenze law about motion of wire through which going electrons is correct also for neutrons, but since neutrons don't moving nother then possible that noone observe lorenze law for neutrons. Of course possible that neutrons don't 'makes' lorenze force, because don't seems, that hard to check it for neutrons between magnets. But still possible, that neutrons radiating waves, when flying with acceleration, what is almost imposible to check nor to detect, because of imposibility to isolate neutrons...
So according to my theory any particle moving with acceleratio radiating 'electromagnetic' waves. Bigger acceleration - stronger radiation. For example supose that to reach speed 1 m/s electron radiating 1 'photon'. Then to reach speed 2 m/s electron radiating 3 photons, because one photon to reach 1 m/s and 2 photons to reach 2 m/s (because at bigger speed there is bigger aceleration relative to standing point). And to accelerate electron to 3 m/s need 1+2+4=7 photons. And to accelerate from 0 to 4 m/s need 1+2+4+8=15 photons. So number of photons needed increasing exponentionaly or 1+x!! . Where x-1 m/s .
To accelerate to 10 m/s need 1+2+4+8+16+32+64+128+256+512=1023 photons. Or about 2^10=1024. So untill waves are very small then they can be ignored, but after some time radiated waves energy becmoing very big. This probably is not actual law, because enshtein formula is not this m=m_0/(1-v/c), but this m=m_0/(1-(v/c)^2)^0.5, but who can say, taht this formula is not exponentional, but with some very small coeficient? So enstein formula is exponentional, but only with more complicated law... So any particle radiating waves and this explains limit of particles moving speed. Why particle mass increase? No, it doesn't increas! But near to particle there is waves, which have big pushing energy. If you try to stop particle, then all this waves energy is gived to you and you thinking, that this particle have big mass... Ou, particle flying without acceleration... Well, possible that particle integrates into wave structure and himself becmoming like long wave... What can be diference between wave and electron scatering anyway? So, yes possible, taht particle becmoning like long big amplitude wave, which have small frenquency... So like imposible instantly to stop electron, then electron smaller difracting,m because longer and he just slowly giving energy to matter and his wavelenght becmoing shorter and shorter and amplitude smaller and smaller. Or possible that electron att all can interference with over electrons and aprticles and thus he giving all energy because stucking and then untill becoming his amplitude and wavelengh shorter he can't go through and difracting. But of course he can't split like 'electromagnetic' waves. He first must give his energy until his size become smaller... That's way fast electrons bad going through not air and not water matter. Since human body is full of water then x-rays don't going through bones... Paper significantly reducing electron speed if electron don't making hole in it. So why there is so nessasary, that electron would be wave? Because only this explain why electron have big mass at relativsitc speed, because his amplitude and wavelenght significanlty increasing! This is true for all solid particles. In atoms electrons have prety long waves, but I doubt that electron can interfere with himself or with over electron... Possible this explains why electron don't falling into nuclear. Because when he falling his speed increasing and wavelenght also, but sometimes electron (and proton) may fuse, because they somehow by spins or somthing over falling with small speed or somthing...
But if electron wavelenght becoming longer at relativistic speed, when how at all it is possible to fly at relativistic speed? Well, maybe imposible for big objects? And possible only if spaceship increasing size?
But I think I found simple solution why increasing electron mass, ha. When electron flying at relativistic speed, then his have big speed, yes? And if you want to decrease it speed, then will be radiated bi amount of waves. That's all! Electron don't have any big mass, but just hard to stop it, because he radiating many electromagnetic waves and there produced many energy, when particle deacelerated. So I think this onece and for all debunking electron -particle-wave nature and electron and over aprticle is just particles and not waves and electrons difraction is somewhy very similar to gamma rays difraction, so either one of them is electrons, eiehter they are... I think gamma rays and electrons is electrons and electrons difraction is electrons scattering over protons or at all scatering over matter... But also possible, that electrons difraction is electrons deaceleration and creation of gamma rays, which then difract in crystal. So electron difraction for now is very very doubfull...

My gravity hypothesis is wrong, becaus if earth is charged negativly, humans and molecuels positivly and sun possitivly and moon possitivly then on moon should be antigravity? Maybe NASA hiding this?

On my waves theory.
Longer and faster waves amplitude is bigger cause they moving faster.

Each matter radiating or reflecting and absorbing combination of amplitudes and this is each matter code of coloure, which understand our eyes.

So seems, that 'faster than light' speed is possible bu need exponentionaly amount of energy for this and nobody have even close amount of energy or maybe imposible because of same reson. But then seems, that there is not exponentional but some over law, but how for sure to check it if say law accuracy is +/-0.001? Or maybe then some problem with radiation of waves, which then becmoing somthing diferently act? But maybe this my exponentional law is good ont he over hand, because if need energy more and more then it is the same...

On the over hand charge theory can't be so easy debunked, probably...
Say, earth surface is negative, withing eacht charge is positive and humans are positive. Then on small distnce humans are atracted and on big distance charge becmoing dominated positive and such distance like moon. Moone then is all negative and thus is atracted by charge inside earth. Sun is also negative and thus atracting earth. Of couse it's ridiculouse and i don't believe in it more, just for fun... Still it is more real, than string theory or quantum computer
Maybe gravity have only neutrons, but it's then more with analizing neutrons stars

Okay, fatality for quantum physics.
Photoefect may be either electrons either UV rays, but this almost don't have diference. Supose that photoefect making waves in my theory. Then waves pushing some electrons from they orbits and then electrons some are farhter then part of waves is reflected from inside structure of matter and going back and then those waves pushing electrons outside. It is obviouse, that photoefect effiecency can't be more than 50%. Now if there is electrons, then electrons also reflecting from atoms inside and hiting to electrons in atoms from inside to outside and making photoefect. Here seems, effiecncy in this case can't be very big at all, but electrons maybe is pushed into nuclear and fused and then atom radiating neutronm, which then decaying into proton and electron and since protons is heavier he remaining and electron escaping... Anyway, there no classical limits for explaining photoeffect.
My theory claims, that there no at all any quantum effects and quantum theory all is wrong till every quant... Entanglement is wrong, superposition is wrong, wavecolapse is wrong, waveparticle duality is wrong, wave frenquency theory is wrong, spin is wrong, strong force is particluarly wrong, heisbenger uncertaitny principle is just diferent kinetic energy particle ability to propogate in environment, so HUP is wrong, schrodinger equation is wrong. SChrodinger equation is just effect of electrons configuration (because of charge and orbital magnetic moment(maybe)) and spins configuration. In benzine there is the same process like in chain reaction of uranium atoms, electrons is somethere by big amplitude wave devided into over molecules and then according to mc^2 produced over waves, which doing uncontroled chain reaction, but for this need contact with air if no such contact, when benzine only firing... In water is not such reaction, because water division is not devid(s)ion (of single molecule) or creation new molecules, but only molecules devision, that's why water don't burn... Chemistry very highly depending on electrons configuration and for this need just calcualte charges and configuration of electrons about nuclear and I am sure, that will be goten the same atoms and molecuels structures and maybe even much more precise and maybe will explain much more some protein folding or over things. This all depending only on covalent ionization energy and electrons structure-gaps... There no need any wave function inschrodinger equation, there no need any electron-waves duality and any phase mysteries. All molecules and atoms are prety stable, because waves loosing they amplitude and speed and spreading everywhere very equaly and holding some average entropy or somthing and thus in all atoms there is average configurated distance and so on of electrons... But us you see there no any wariantions for proper working like in quantum mechanic, except very stable waves spreading "Architecture"... For example, why uranium atom deviding slower neutrons? According some quantum theory assumptions, because slower neutrons have bigger uncertainty and this can be true, because slower neutrons many times reflected from nuclears have more chance to shoot into nuclear, than fast electrons also don't interacting and going outside of matter, because of they very small size. Anither reason can be, that slower neutron longer being in nuclear and thus making bigger chance and better chance for coloumb force to push...
Conclusion: all quantum mechanic is wrong.

Here is interesting consequence. Possible that even enshtein theory is not precise.
Electron acceleration depending on frenquency in electric cirquit. But this not nessasary is true, because in most cases there is more electrons, that bigger aceleration of eecltrons, but according textbook, but maybe this is right if electron speed is small.. So according to textbook E=a=f^2. So if increase frenquency two times then energy or electric field increasing 4 times - quadraticaly, if frenquency incrse 3 times, electric field 9 times, but who actualy understand electric field? There is some density of electric field which is I=E^2, so if icreasing frenquency 3 times then total energy increasing 3^4=81 times. Somthing similar like with enstein square and quadrat, which decreasing result, becaus it is 4tical. So to reach kinetic energy of E=0.5mv^2 need to reach speed and need energy aceleration v^2... So if we want to reach kinetic energy and speed 3 m/s then need will be radiated 4.5 photons, but at each step acceleration is not the same relative to standing point, hm... So there is some very strange conjecture. Aha, there is twice aceleration. But after each meter acceleration increasing like this 0.5v^2 * 0.5v^2 * 0.5v^2 and there is some integral. And since electron have surface quadratic then densitiy and intensity increasing quadraticlay like I=E^2=a^2=f^4. How there to integrate enshtein relativity theory with this all? Okey say we want increase speed twice then say radiation will increase 2^4=16 times. If we want to increase speed from 0.5c to 1c then radiation should increase 16 times, but this seems, ridiculouse, because this like from 1 MeV accelerate to 16 MeV. But in acclerators there is reached energy 100 times bigger than rest mass. And even bilions times. But probably 100 times than by newton theory. Not so much, huh? So possible maybe need to take one mote time 16^2=256, because acceleration and energy for speed have nothing to do... Then it's means, that to accelerate from 0.5c to c need not twice more energy but 256 times more energy. Then possible that sciencists don't have so much energy and electron don't reaching bigger speed than light. Also possible that cosmic particles traveling faster than ligh, but who knows they speed? They living 256 times more or even more if they are lighter... And maybe sciencists can't accelerate to bigger speed, because of they inconcistnce to work they electric field at bigger than c speed? And not balanced for such speed? But maybe they simply don't have so much energy for such strong electric field (256 times more energy is not joke). Maybe electricity speed is also not limited, but limited speed of detectors and thus amount of energy detection. Because to accelerate electrons need more energy and to detect this energy... So possible that charge and magnetic field acting with infinity speed. And say if from 0.5 to c need 256 times more energy than from 0 to 0.5c, then from c to 2c need also 256 times more energy, that is out of sciencists possibility. Because possible, that only at 0.5c speed particles radiating very strong waves and at over speed don't radiating significant energy of particle. time slowing of course because of tendation to decay separatign waves energy, which will be radiated so particles, which tend to decay radiating small electromagnetic waves even when they flying without acceleration. But then they somehow still decaying... Of course if such particles at all exist, because how to decaying neutron at big speed imposible to check, because of imposiblity to accelerate because of charge... But I more tend to think, that for accelration from 0.5c to 1c need roughly 16 times more energy. OR more precisly 1.547*16=18 times more energy. Supose, that for 0.5c you need 10^10 J, then for c speed need 16*10^10 J. Not so much, just need time and correct electricity regulation in cilindr, but electricity slower accting, than particle can fly and thus electricity in most cases slowing down particle. Sometimes maybe sciencists geting... Anyway, possible that enstein formula is absolutly wrong, more analize in over post amybe...

Okay, electrons acceleration in coliders is to about 10 GeV and more maybe up to 100 GeV and maybe not. Let's calcualte how much energy need to acceleare proton to 0.5c speed.
We can use newton formula:
E=0.5mv^2=1.6726/10^27 *(1.5*10^8)^2=3.76335/10^11 J =235209375 eV=235 MeV.
235 MeV*16=3.76335 GeV. Hey, almost 10 GeV! Maybe +/-0.6 is errors? Maybe they can't capture single proton and saying, that some too much or too small number of protons accelerated? And maybe somtimes they realy accelerating faster than ligh? And like say, electricisty speed is smaller than c and about 0.5c or at most 0.7c-0.9c...

So enshtein relativity theory very possible that is wrong.

In textbook writen, that for radio is match better higher frenquencies, because increasing frenquency 2 times energy of waves increasing 2^4=16 times, but I think this is wrong and energy increasing 2^2=4 times, because if energy increasing 16 times, then if for 100 MHz radio neew 1 W, then for 100 kHz radio need 1000^4=10^12=10 TW. Not so much, huh? Then if say radio station 100 MHz working at 1mW then 100 kHz working at 10^9 W=1GW. Still not so much, huh? Like atomic reactor consuming energy. Then if for 1mikroW 100 MHz radio station need, for 100 kHz need 1 MW station - mroe real. One microW is say 1 mV and 1 mA.
Somewhy in this place I don't trust my textbook and I think, that radio waves 2^2 acting. But what it means? Yes, that there no any limits for acceleration of particles and that relativistic law don't exist! I long time wonder how this proccessors working at 3 GHz if they can travel only such distance in about 15 GHz, but for quadratic traveling need much more speed of electricity.So I concluding, that electricity speed measurments is wrong and electricity have infinity speed, but possible that on smaller distance speed of electricity is measured faster, because need smaller wire and smaller charging incomingof electrons into wire and thus all goes faster, than in big long big frenquency wire. So speed of electricity and speed of gravity is infinity. Magnetism speed also infinity. Electric and magnetic fields speeds are infinity.
So any particle is possible to accelerate to any speed and since noboty know many about particles then maybe living they not longer? Maybe some cosmic particles is created already in earth? Anyway even if particles can live longer then it is only because, if they will split then deacelereate and radiates very big waves and this holding them longer possible...
But since processores can't control LHC faster than light, because of processors speed then at all somthing strange and not scincific going on in such colaiders, there where no at all no any big speed, but jsut many 1000 km/s protons, which creating many noisy. Or they acelerated to big speed and sciencists don't creating scheme to accelerate them more, but still how they would know that they energy is from relativistic speed and not from somthing else? And yes, increasing not only kinetic energy of particles, but also energy, which they will radiate when will be stoped, but this energy possible still not significantly large than particle kinetic energy. So possible there no any mc^2 energy, but only E=m. Oh yes, atoms mass defect is mc^2. But maybe there is only neutron kinetic energy, which just deviding thread. Imagine, that there is spring wich very strongly supressed and only one small tread holding it and if you divide it then kinetic energy of protons charge will be released. But there says, that is heavier... Maybe more neutrons, huh? Anihilation producing energy mc^2. Who measure this energy? Maybe just m? Maybe at all no anihilation and antiparticles?
Seems, that enshtein also was cranck...

Okay, since my waves theory very strangly and mysticlay explaining colourse, then probably current waves theory is right and waves don't travles faster than speed of light. So electromagnetic waves are like waves in air. There is gap between them and then flying at certain speed. This speed depending on distance between smallest balls. This distance is equal to or almost infinity part of smallest sphere or some 1/1000000000000000000 or some 1/10^100, but obviously that very small and this explains limit of speed c... So why going on polarization? Polarization is just the same vibration, but longer waves expanding faster than shorter (the same like in air) so if waves are polarized then they almost don't expanding and there flying some fringers/fingers of air type waves. If this fingers of waves going through ortogonal polarizer, then they somehow loosing they wave structure and becoming more like spots and then probably more easily absorbed and alsmost can't difract or they just then difracting and interferencing and just becoming some incoherent aborbtion process or maybe this waves never will be able to excide atoms or just by difraction changing they direction and thus are absorbed. So there much more realistic that waves are the same like in air! Bigger speed making bigger frenquency waves and smaller speed of say electrons amking smaller frenquency waves. But there seems, that still must be some vibration instead just speed like in my previouse theory. Well, those vibrations can create some electrons rotations or atoms motions or just Borh model rambling and schrodinger equation... This means, that smallest spheres have mass and on they mass possible depending light speed. So seems, that there imposible to describe distance between those spheres. But only can be conclusiont, that very big amplitude not big frenquency waves can create prety big gap between spheres and this gap can eat matter, because then such things like electrons don't exist and particles will become electromagnetic waves or somthing. But possible that in universe don't exist such big gaps. And also if infinty space hodling only one sphere gap then this gap spreading everywhere will make, that between spheres is infinity small gap and thus speed of light should be infinity unless spheres mass is infinity small or almost don't exist...
So seems, that some things in quantum mechanic is not wrong like frenquency, possible particluarly schrodinger equation...

Okay, I think I found consequence, between radiated energy and energy of particle.
So kinetic energy or aceleration is a=0.5*v^2, but radiated waves energy is 0.25*v^4, because waves are radiated not according to acceleration, but according to acceleration relative to standing point.
thus say, that particle have kinetic energy mv^2 roughly say v^2 J.
So to accelerate in some untis of particle need to speed c need c^2=9*10^17 J, say and energy which will be radiated by particle is say c^4 /10^10=8.1*10^33 /10^10=8.1*10^23 J. Relativity, huh? At small speed say v=1000 m/s, kinetic energy of particle is 10^6 J and radiated energy 1000^4 /10^10=100 J. So at small speed radiated energy is much smaller. But then it's means, that possible to fly at speed of light, why not? Since sincists can accelerate electron to mass of proton. Then just need to calculate coefiecient of waves.
(c^4 /x)/v^2=2000,
c^4 * v^2 =2000*x,
x=c^4 * v^2 /2000,
x=8.1*10^33 *9*10^16 /2000=3.645*10^47;
if x=0.25*0.5*3.645*10^47=4.55625*10^46 aproximatly possible is x.
So then electromagnetic waves radiated energy is aproximatly particle size or just particle or mass to divide by x, I mean, particle mv^4 /x=mv^4 /4.55625*10^46 . But mass here can be wrong, beacuase all can depend not on mass, but on particle size and I am very doubful about coliders, because need processors to synchronize them, which would work faster than speed of light and realy faster than speed of electricity. So my formula can be right and enshtein ramblig formula is wrong. And according to my theory, when particle flying without acceleration he radiating energy mv^2 /x=mv^2 /4.55625*10^46, so it's almost not seen and thus sciensits say, that without acceleration there no radiation. So possible that our earth radiating energy, but it is so small, when roatates about sun, that it alsmots don't making any friction even after bilions years... Earth radiating energy like it flyign with acceleration v^2 /4.55625*10^46, but I would say, that more pressure from sun pushin earth than earth becmoing rotates slower... bilions yeasr is only about 10^17 seconds so it will not radiate even close energy to mv^2, but only 10^17 * mv^2 /10^46=mv^2 /10^29, this is so small energy per earth live.
So enstein was wrong and coliders are wrong.
Time stoping becoming only from waves radiation, because electrons must fly slower, becuase many energy radiating in waves phorm. This is the same about particles decay, because for decaying need more strong waves to vibrate.

So, YES, there is medium in space or matter, this medium is smallest particles, it's explains why radiation energy is y^4.
So according to my smallest particles theory any object depending on it size radiating 'electromagnetic' waves of energy 0.5*v^2, where v is speed of particle. If particle moving with aceleration then it radiating energy a^2=0.25*v^4.
So I prove that there no vacum in universe and anythere. All space is filled with smallest spheres, through which going air like waves.
Even if enshtein relativistic theory is right, my theory still is not wrong and still everythings acts according to this law, except maybe particles size changing it charge. So air waves also is possible to polarize, but need very deep fringers/finger in matter to check air waves polarization, but air waves are a little bit diferent than my theory waves, because smallest balls is not atoms, but spheres... I am now only not sure does universe must fluctate for traveling light through space like in air there is thermal fluctation of molecules of air.
But seems, that even air have it "relativistic" speed, because at very big speed object will burn in air so in air imposible to travel faster than some speed...

In over words to accelerate particle to speed v need energy 0.5mv^2, but when particle flying at speed, he radiating energy E=v, but total energy will be radiated is like kinetic E=0.5v^2, but since particle moving at aceleration radiating also energy and stronger than just on some speed, then total energy is E^2=0.25v^4 will be radiated to accelerate particle to speed v. When particle flying some distance from point A to point B, then he radiating energy E=v*t, where t is time. So radiated in this case energy is very small and moving at speed v radiated energy is almost invisible and that's what I call friction os spheres/medium...
For example particle flying at speed 1 m/s radiating 1 ball/s, at 2 m/s radiating 2 balls/s, 3 m/s radiating 3 balls/s. But why not 0.5v^2 ? Well, mayby exactly 0.5v^2 balls/s, because if there need force always, then means, that there is acceleration. So more possible that at 2 m/s particle radiating 0.5*2^2=2 balls/s, at 3 m/s particle radiating 0.5*3^2=4.5 ball/s, at 4 m/s particle radiating 0.5*4^2=8 balls/s and so on. Now if you want accelerate particle to speed v then need 0.5*0.5(v^2)^2=0.25v^4 balls energy. For example, to accelerate particle to 1 m/s speed need energy E=0.25v^4=0.25*1^4=0.25 balls energy, and to accelerate to 2 m/s speed need (will be radiated ) E=0.25*2^4=4 balls. To accelerate to 3 m/s, will be radiated 0.25*3^4=20.25 balls. Per acceleration to 4 m/s speed (from 0 m/s) will be radiated 0.25*4^4=64 balls.
So it match with my textbook data that on twice bigger frenquency particle radiating 16 times bigger energy, or at 3 times bigger frenquency there is radtion 3^4=81 times bigger. So everything match with my smallest balls theory, that there is medium. So particle flying at some speed loosing it energy, but almost invisible, because very small amount. For example at speed v=0.5c=1.5*10^8 m/s particle radiating less energy per 100 seconds, than it will radiates if will be accelerated to v=1000 m/s, because
P_v=0.5*(1.5*10^8)^2=1.125*10^16 balls (or say J/s=W),
W_v=E_v=1.125*10^16 (balls/s) *100 (s) =1.125*10^18 balls (or J);
W_a=E_a=0.25*(1000)^4=2.5*10^11 balls (or say J).
Bad example in this case at 0.5c speed per 100 seconds more radiated energy of ~10 milions times, than will be radiated energy for particle acceleratio to 1000 m/s speed. So let's compare with particle acceleration to c/3000=10^5 m/s=100 km/s:
W_a=0.25*(10^5)^4=2.5*10^19 balls (or Joules). So accelerated particle to speed 100 km/s will radiate ~10 times more energy than particle flying at 0.5c=150 000 km/s speed 100 seconds. So possible that particle at 0.5c radiating some radiowaves or infrared waves, which almost can't be detected.
For example radio with frenquency 100 Mhz radiating some radiowaves, which energy of single electron radiation is 0.25*f^4=0.25*(10^8)^4=2.5*10^31 balls/s.
And particle which flying with speed 0.5c radiating 1.125*10^16 balls/s. Somthing wrong, because frenquency can't be equal to speed or acceleration, acceleration is a=f^2 so 0.5*(10^8)^2=5*10^15 balls/s. So possible, that particle radiating the same energy like one electron in radio station cirquit of 100 Mhz. So ver small energy...
Now why particles radiating biger frenquency waves instead bigger amplitude like in dynamics of speakers? Well, since particles are very small, then... On the over hand it depending on acceleration, but why still, oh, yes, why? Why? Well, possible, that particles like some planes radiating all frenquency waves, but more big frenquency waves and there still no evidence about gamma rays radiation or x rays... At bigger temperature particles faster vibrating with bigger frenquency, but they radiating many frenquencies waves. Well, maybe big amplitude and small frenquency radiation just nobody can detect. Usualy in air vibrations, shorter waves have smaller amplitude and longer waves have bigger amplitude and they both is hearing with same amplitude, but jsut then normalized, because shorter waves vibrating more frenquently and with bigger speed. The bigger amplitude the bigger vibration speed of both waves (shorter or longer). So maybe if faster moving particle he radiating bigger frenuency waves. Or if with bigger aceleration... So to create big amplitude small frenquency waves need very match electrons to vibrate or if one electron, then he must be at some big voltage or somthing, that he would accelerate to very big speed and then go back and so then would be long big amplitude wave. So h*f is particularly correct and precisly there all waves have the same properties like in air. For example if you want to create very big amplitude long wave then need very fast acelerate particle to say 0.1c speed in distance of 1000 km and then deaccelerate and to make to go back this particle and then there will be very long wave, but seems, that particle with this all deacelerations itself will radiate waves, because he sometimes will fly faster than wave, what is unusual in air waves. Also possible that longer wave better reflecting, but probably just shorter waves usualy created with bigger amplitude than longer waves, because distance between vibration gap is the same, but impulse of wave and speed is bigger of shorter wave (how then it flying not faster, you ask), but possible that because there is fluctations then speed is the same like in air or possible, that shorter-faster wave taking more balls pushing sumation and thus speed is the same as just with smaller balls sumation-pushation like longer-slower wave-impulse. Nature just won't to create equal waves, the same energy you can sear at some 20-20000 Hz, but not at 10^15-10^16 Hz, where just no such big things without gaps which vibrating very long distance. For example your tongue for longer waves vibrating about in distance of say 2-5 mm and for shorter waves it vibrating only 0.02-0.05 mm, but you hearing the same amplitude for bigger amplitude speed increasing and distance of vibration increasing, but frenquency remaining the same. And as you see for small particles and objects there is very hard to vibrate on very big distance. If you with hand in distance 10 cm would be able to vibrate at 10^18 Hz frenquency, then you will radiate very big amplitude some radiowaves. But you will need even more energy, because particles in your hand will become radiate energy and because they are small, they at bigg frenquency just can't radiate long waves like if you will do very much atom size gaps in dynamic and will turn on it to hear some 20-100 Hz waves and you will hear probably only very short waves or nothing. So I think I give plenty much reasons, why there is such thing like h*f, but which of course don't means any quants, but just small particles imposiblity to radiate long waves with big amplitude.