Not GP but since you asked, here it is: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/325462944_Planck%27s_Constant_and_the_Nature_of_Light https://www.researchgate.

Not GP but since you asked, here it is: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/325462944_Planck%27s_Constant_and_the_Nature_of_Light https://www.researchgate.net/publication/325462944_Planck%27... The argument is: Planck's relation says that a photon's energy is in proportion to its frequency. But a higher-frequency photon oscillates more times per second. If you look at the energy of a single oscillation, you get a constant, regardless of frequency. This is remarkable and so we should reframe Planck's constant as the fundamental "energy per cycle." The problem is that "energy of a single cycle" cannot be related to other measures of energy, e.g. the binding energy of an electron in the photoelectric effect. Basically it seems like unit sophistry.