QM without "photons" or Schrödinger's wave equation?

I would appreciate assistance in finding approaches
to quantum theory along the lines described below.
Apologies in advance if the collapse of these
question-functions results in deposition of a groan
or the urge to tear out remaining hair!

1 - While recognising that our attempts at observing
electromagnetic radiation (emr) usually (perhaps
always) involves lasting changes in the state of
matter resulting from the deposition of a quanta
of energy . . . . is there an approach to quantum
theory which sees the emr itself as simply waves
which carry the probability of deposition of
quanta, where these waves are not in any way
quantitised in themselves? Where the waves from
different sources of about the same frequency
add or subtract (according to phase) and produce
a mixed field which is just the same as any other
emr? (That is, a straight mixing of endlessly
divisible emr - no spooky QM "superposition".)

2 - While recognising that moving objects (eg.
electrons, helium atoms and buckyballs) exhibit
interference patterns in suitable circumstances
with a wavelength inversely proportional to their
momentum with respect to the barrier and detector
. . . is there any theory which does not insist
that the objects (particles) themselves are waves
in any way? For instance, by viewing the
interference pattern as probably resulting from
the probability field of the particle (at the
slits and/or the detector) being convolved with
a series of peaks in the direction of travel?

Q1 is seeking a vision of quantum theory without the
usual point-to-point, magical collapse of the
wavefunction, "photon". Two microwave transmitters
or two lasers of the same frequency create perfectly
good interference patterns, including when the beam
power is so low that only the occasional quanta is
deposited.

A discussion of some experiments which show this is:

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-bib_query?bibcode=1986RvMP...58..=
209P
Interference between independent photons
Paul, H. Reviews of Modern Physics, Volume 58,
Issue 1, January 1986, pp.209-231

On page 221, H. Paul attempts to reconcile what I
regard as perfectly classical mixing of independent
emr sources whilst still hanging on to the "photon"
concept, by redefining "photon" as:

"an energy packet hv taken from the superposition
field to which both lasers contribute equally".

But just before that, he seems to avoid a classical
view of the emr itself, and thereby retains "photon"
as something to do with the emr itself (not solely
deposition of energy) by saying that according to QM:

"the photon number in a Glauber state is
intrinsically indefinite; hence one is not
justified in considering the number of photons in
each beam (during one trial) to be a definite
quantity, in the sense of classical reality."

What is the experimental evidence that emr is, in
itself, quantitised? I feel sure it is not - which
raises the old mystery of how a weak field can
occasionally (according to our observational
techniques) deposit a whole quanta of energy in just
one spot, whilst removing just the right amount of
signal from the overall emr field.

Q2 amounts to asking about Quantum Mechanics without
Schrödinger's wave equation, which seems (to my newbie
mind) to be a purely mathematical construct based on
the notion that the field of probability for where we
find the particle *is* (or can only be described as) the
sum total of a bunch of waves, which we have no direct
physical method of detecting - some of which have
velocities faster than light.

An electron, helium atom or buckyball moving towards
a two-slit barrier, or a Fresnel zone-plate, followed
by a detector screen, certainly exhibits wave-like
interference properties - but the direction and
wavelength of the wave behaviour which would most
easily explain the interference pattern are directly
related to the momentum of the particle with respect
to the barrier and detector. This wave-like behaviour
does not seem to be intrinsic to the particle, or
depend at all on what kind of matter it is made of.

The same particle, encountering a second set of
zone-plate or two-slit barrier (and corresponding
detector screen) which was moving with respect to the
first set would exhibit wave-like behaviour which
has no direct relationship to its behaviour with the
first set.

Here is some 1999 research which remains the best
example of focusing helium atoms with a zone plate.
They are moving at around 1130 metres/sec (my rough
calculation), focused into a small (several micron)
spot 43 cm from a 270 micron diameter zone-plate:

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-bib_query?bibcode=1999APS..4CF..E=
C03D
Towards Realization of an Atomic deBroglie
Microscope: Helium Atom Focusing Using Fresnel Zone
Plates
Doak, R. B.; Grisenti, R. I.; Rehbein, S.; Schmahl,
G.; Toennies, J. P.; Wöll, Ch.
http://physics.asu.edu/doak/

Two slit and other interference experiments with
buckyballs:

http://www.quantum.univie.ac.at/research/matterwave/c60/
http://www.quantum.univie.ac.at/research/matterwave/stehwelle/standinglig=
htwave.html

Buckyballs exhibit a de Broglie wavelength of about 2.5
picometres - about 1/400th of their diameter.

- Robin http://astroneu.com

.