The Structured Atomic Model accepts 2 fundamental particles, electron and proton.
After describing the nucleus structure, the chemical properties in the periodic table of elements can be described.
The electron is a fundamental particle. It never decays into pieces nor can it be broken into pieces to investigate any components. We must accept we cannot describe any particles which combine to become this particle called an electron. This is the limit of our technology.
I am justified to call an electron a fundamental particle simply because we are unable to break it. Based on that limitation, one can suggest any cascade of sub-particles having any characteristics but with no evidence for any of them.
Particle colliders including LHC broke protons and neutrons into 3 subparticles each but these 2 have different charges so the sets of 3 were given different names. these quark names like bottom, top, up, down, charm, strange are meaningless. That destruction lead to the game of the standard model and its array of quarks and quasiparticles. That standard model contributed nothing compared to the structured atomic model which makes a connection to chemistry behaviors including alpha particle emission during radioactive decay, while the standard model offers nothing for these fundamental behaviors. I suggest breaking a proton accomplished almost nothing worthwhile beyond the scale of an atom.
The Standard Model of particle physics is the theory describing three of the four known fundamental forces (the electromagnetic, weak, and strong interactions, and not including the gravitational force) in the universe, as well as classifying all known elementary particles. It was developed in stages throughout the latter half of the 20th century, through the work of many scientists around the world, with the current formulation being finalized in the mid-1970s upon experimental confirmation of the existence of quarks. Since then, confirmation of the top quark (1995), the tau neutrino (2000), and the Higgs boson (2012) have added further credence to the Standard Model. In addition, the Standard Model has predicted various properties of weak neutral currents and the W and Z bosons with great accuracy.
Although the Standard Model is believed to be theoretically self-consistent and has demonstrated huge successes in providing experimental predictions, it leaves some phenomena unexplained and falls short of being a complete theory of fundamental interactions. It does not fully explain baryon asymmetry, incorporate the full theory of gravitation as described by general relativity, or account for the accelerating expansion of the Universe as possibly described by dark energy. The model does not contain any viable dark matter particle that possesses all of the required properties deduced from observational cosmology. It also does not incorporate neutrino oscillations and their non-zero masses.
Interactions in physics are the ways that particles influence other particles. At a macroscopic level, electromagnetism allows particles to interact with one another via electric and magnetic fields, and gravitation allows particles with mass to attract one another in accordance with Einstein's theory of general relativity.
There are 2 basic problems here, while ignoring the substantial details.
1) Light is a wave not a particle,
Light is a form of electromagnetic radiation, or EMR
EMR is the propagation of synchronized, perpendicular electric and magnetic fields. The oscillation of these fields is measured as either wavelength or frequency. The propagation of these fields has been measured in a vacuum and assigned to the constant c. The diffraction index for the medium defines the reduction in the velocity of propagation in that medium.
A prism can be explained only with light as a wave, not a particle.
With the photoelectric effect, the observed quantized behavior is defined by the element's electron configuration, not by the light.
The photon is a fictitious particle assigned to a single wavelength of EMR.
EMR has an angle between the fields and the direction of propagation. This is called polarization.
This EMR polarization is called the photon spin. This is misleading because there is no particle which can 'spin' so claims of photon spin entanglement are really just checking whether the EMR polarization changed. Perhaps the real particle electron can spin but a wavelength is not a particle.
Einstein's theory of relativity is an invalid basis for an interpretation of gravity.
excerpt from Wikipedia:
Gravity is most accurately described by the general theory of relativity (proposed by Albert Einstein in 1915), which describes gravity not as a force, but as a consequence of the curvature of spacetime caused by the uneven distribution of mass. However, for most applications, gravity is well approximated by Newton's law of universal gravitation, which describes gravity as a force, which causes any two bodies to be attracted to each other, with the force proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them.
Both sentences are intentionally misleading.
1st sentence can be fixed by this change:
Gravity was described by the general theory of relativity (proposed by Albert Einstein in 1915), which describes gravity not as a force, but as a consequence of the curvature of the moving observer's spacetime caused by the uneven distribution of mass.
2nd sentence can be fixed by:
However, for all applications other than the special case of the moving observer, gravity is well explained by Newton's law of universal gravitation, which describes gravity as a force, which causes any two bodies to be attracted to each other, with the force proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them.
Space-time curvature applies only to the moving observer's reference frame, or their space-time.
All other observers do not use that special reference frame or space-time.
The purpose of the standard model is explaining and predicting behaviors of quarks and their combinations, including quasiparticles when quarks fail.
For all those not interested in particle physics for the behaviors of quarks, the standard model is just trivia.