Einstein was wrong.
The whole point of this thread is to put forth the idea that a photon is not a particle, but a burst traveling through the medium of space.
Except you put forth no way of testing your
idea, given an idea is not a theory, in the science definition of the word.
Do electromagnetic disturbances come in packets ie quanta? Yes, experiment has proven that. Does modern physics know how to describe the double slit experiment? Yes, experiment has proven it. Does modern physics steadfastly claim photons and other quanta are literally
particles (ie billard ball like entities)? No. When a physicist says "The photon is a particle of light" he or she doesn't mean "Photons lack wave properties, they are ballistic in nature" but rather the use of the word 'particle' is to refer to the quantum field theory concept of a quantum of fluctuation in a particular field.
Have people considered using some kind of gravity based theory to try and describe electromagnetism? Yes. Kaluza and Klein did it in the mid 1920s using a 5 dimensional general relativity model. It leads to inconsistent predictions. However, their methods (dimensional compactification) are central to string theory. A part of string theory known as the AdS/CFT correspondence uses a gravitational description to describe particle behaviours. However, due to the nature of it's description it doesn't literally consider the photon a ripple in space-time.
So your
idea is not a new one. Taking a model which we know describes gravity, ie general relativity, we have tried to describe photons and any other particle you wish to name. They are not describable in terms of gravity. There's a whole slew of technical descriptions relating space-time perturbations, decompositions and dualities which exist within current or previous models of physics which, unlike your arm waving vacuous
idea, actually had some quantitative stuff to back them up. They either fell by the wayside or involve other things such as gravitons, virtual particles and extra dimensions.
The quantum mechanical description of the double slit experiment is independent of what you're actually throwing through the slit, be it a photon and electron or a Bucky ball. I've told you where to read about said description, you obviously aren't interested. Simply saying a question you could answer yourself if you spent a little time reading mainstream physics doesn't mean that answer you haven't bothered to try and find doesn't exist.
