Georgina,
All three of your posts taken together go to what W. Benshy posted to me on Nov 13 in this Topic, and my response. As yet there is no general consensus in either classical or quantum physics, nor across disciplines, that defines what a particle actually exists as, as an object. Characteristic 'properties' parameterized from observation of interactive behavior is the best we have to go on. And then there is the dispute between classical and quantum as to how action is transferred.
Classical holds that it is transferred either by a wavelike action of a physical energy field, or as a projected burst of physical energy though no classical consensus stands as to what the real physical shape might be.
Quantum holds that the energy field is made up of discrete quantum unit species and that action is tranfered by particle exchange.
Both recognize and operate on the observation that the macro phenomenon you describe are boundary conditions of properties associated with the ambiguous 'particulate matter', as those properties become altered with energy transfer. And Both recognize and operate on the observation that energy transfer is directly detectable only at the receiving end, and can only be theorized on the emission end [as in Bohr's famous but ad hoc instantaneous Quantum Leap]. What is accepted is that a receiver will react at a rate of change of energy which will either follow a ballistic (parabolic) curve associated with inelastic collision, or at a rate that will follow a hyperbolic curve associated with an inelastic collision or sinusoidal wave.
That's the challenge as it currently stands, and woe to those whom come up with solution. If it satisfies one paradigm it disgruntles the other. All I can say is; Good Luck. :-)