Contents:

I/ The physical reality behind physics’ electromagnetic wave.
II/ How physics’ mathematical wave overlooks the nature of Nature.
III/ And how that compels physics to wonder into an un-unimaginable world.
IV/ Physics has other means (than wave and photon) to interpret Reality.
V/ The photoelectric phenomenon is much simpler than Einstein’s explanation.
VI/ The quanta of light.
VII/ Is intensity the heart of the problem?
VIII/ The inescapable conclusion.
IX/ The intrinsic value of physics.

I/ The amplitude of physics’ electromagnetic wave is, in reality, directly proportional to the electric charge (Maxwell first equation) and that is to the number of electrons generating the wave.
Now considering a wave emitted by an antenna rather than an atom, the maximum speed of the electrons which travel back and forth in the antenna defines the frequency of the wave. We consider the maximum speed because that speed is not constant, it varies from zero to a maximum and the converse twice within one cycle.

The book "The Harmony of Reality, in no Time... " (pages 91 and following, see link below) shows how the shape of the physical wave, propagating between emitting and receiving electrons, is determined by both the number and the speed of the emitting electrons; and how both contribute to a single parameter, that is the slope of the wave.

II/ The point is that Nature does a distinction that physics cannot do.
The variation of the slope (of the human designed wave) which is due (in reality) to the number of emitting electrons, energizes in a receiving antenna or a photoelectric material, a number of electrons proportional to the number of emitting electrons.
And the variation of the slope (of our human designed wave) which is due (in reality) to the speed (energy) of the emitting electrons, restitutes to the receiving electrons, speeds (energy) that are proportional to that of the emitting electrons (also proportional to the frequency of the emitting current).

III/ Implemented through the variation of the slope of the wave, are two distinct effects of energy that are undistinguishable through physics’ “design” of the wave.
Having no way to distinguish between the two effects, Physics invokes first a wave (Maxwell equation) for the number of electrons, then a particle photon (Einstein interpretation) for the frequency energetic effect.
Unfortunately, for us laypersons, these two entities (continuous wave and discrete particle) are physically incompatible.
Nevertheless in physics this (physically un-imaginable) duality is mandated and accepted as a fact of life.

As mentioned above "The Harmony of Reality, in no Time... " (link below) book provides the wave a physical yet single (rather than dual) physical configuration that implements the experimental distinction.
Note that once we (human or experimental physics) observe two phenomenon (number and speed of electrons) both at emission and at reception, we (theoretical physics) are entitled to interpret the two phenomenon independently. Our layperson's contention is that physics' chosen interpretation is not logical. Particle and wave do not mix in our minds.

IV/ Physics’ very concepts allow for a clear differentiation though.
The amplitude of the wave is a function of the number of emitting electrons, not a function of time.
The frequency is coincidental to the motion of the electrons, a factor instead occurring in time.
As can be seen Physics could use Nature's means to make the distinction without the help of the photon.

V/ In view of the photoelectric phenomenon Einstein felt compelled to introduce the photon.
Yet higher emitting frequencies, coinciding to faster emitting electrons, produce in a photoelectric material, faster electrons; that is electrons with higher energy. And this no matter the intensity of the wave, or no matter the number of electrons excited. Again who needs the photon? Certainly not Nature.

VI/ And because the smallest emission of light coincides to a single emitting electron, light is still emitted as quanta of energy that are minimal quantities that cannot be further divided.
There is a major distinction between gravimotion’s quantum and physics’ photon quantum though. In the theory of gravimotion quanta-of-light occur in the form of motion rather than in the form of particles. Gravimotion's motion-quanta extend-in or use time as much as they extend-in or use space. Gravimotion’s quantum expends coincidently in space and in time just as a wave does.
As an analogy consider sound-waves. In the gravimotion theory the quantum-of-light is analogous to the motion of a “discrete” air molecule translating the sound-wave.
Gravimotion’s electromagnetic waves have all the characteristics of the conventional waves.

By contrast physics’ photon is a discrete particle, often compared to a bullet and frankly incompatible with the constitution of the wave.
Physics' particle photons are made of mass like material (electrically neutral) and do not need time to exist. Physics’ photon is mathematically made of frequency, which is identified to energy. In this particular case of physics, energy, which is usually identified to kinetic or potential energy is identified instead to the frequency of the electromagnetic wave.

VII/ Is intensity the heart of the problem?
In physics the continuous aspect of light (the wave) no doubt coincides to a continuous flow of energy. This has to be (in physics) because the dis-continuous format of the particle photon is of discrete packets of energy (the opposite of continuous flow).
Because physics’ intensity of light is the trouble maker in the photoelectric phenomenon, light’s continuous flow of energy (in physics) no doubt coincides to physics’ definition of light intensity. And that definition consists of an integration or an average of the wave.

Now if one considers objectively a physical wave, which is exclusively made of ups and downs, physically (that is in reality and not in physics) the flow of energy in a wave is nothing but continuous! The flow of energy follows the peaks and troughs and the in-between states of the wave. Even though extremely elegant and attractive the mathematical integration providing physics concept of intensity might be the culprit and might not be conform with Nature’s own design.

VIII/ The inescapable conclusion.
Whereas our (layperson’s) discomfort about the photon is clear (sections I to V above), the explanation of that discomfort is much more complex (sections VI and VII).
Yet whether the culprit is Maxwell or Einstein (or both!), physics’ representation of the electromagnetic wave is unsatisfactory.
While Nature is coherent, physics' interpretation of it is incoherent or at best confusing.
Above all Nature is much simpler than the interpretation physics makes of it!
The mission of gravimotion is to shed light on these subjects

IX/ The above does not in any manner affect the accomplishments of physics.
Thanks to physics’ experiments and interpretation, we the human race made gigantic steps in studying Nature.
And thanks to physics only can one imagine such alternate theory as gravimotion.
Gravimotion has for mission to emphasize that our thinking of Nature should be as coherent as Nature is consistent.

To read more about gravimotion click on the link below.