Interesting additions to that Wiki. Unfortunately, unwelcome thinking like yours, and to a lesser degree these days, like mine, brings out the negative hyper intuitiveness of people who get chummy with each and then start sharing their disdain in what I find to be an obnoxious display off topic banter.
You make some valid points, provide links, and when someone fails to make valid counterpoints, but instead unleashes their disdain, I don't blame you for reposting the links and ideas that they failed to dispel.
There are forums for people who insist on discussions that contain no alternative ideas, or speculation. This forum, at least in its current posture, allows that, and my suggestion to those who insist on hard science and no discussion of speculative ideas, go where they and their children will be safe from people who think like you and me.
In the mean time, the concept of an aether or a medium of space is great discussion topic in a science forum. People want to make it out as absurd, but it does fit into place where some of the generally accepted science thinking falls short. Quantum gravity for example is a popular topic, as are gravity waves and their means of transmission.
Here is a small portion of the following link with some comments that might help bring the discussion back on topic:
Scienceblogs
Or is really both. And it makes sense to me that the composition of particles would be both wave and particle like if they exert and respond to gravity. The wave nature could represent the gravity waves that they emit and "feel", and the particle nature could be what the wave-particle resolves to when observed directly.
Or you will find it in one place but you will not be able to see the wave associated with it directly, only in the interference pattern that appears in various experiments. But even if you observe only the particle state, maybe the wave state goes on unobserved.
That is certainly observable, and an apparatus can be rigged at home (I do it) that will demonstrate the pattern you get with two slits and with one slit. Interference is easy to see and understand as the wave associated with the particle, and that wave goes through both slits to produce it. The particle is always detected to have gone through one or the other slit.
True to the extent that quantum physics takes it. The possibility of continuous wave action in the medium of space though, would add a continuous background within which the discrete quantum nature of particles and light emerges. Along with the view that there is a foundational medium and continuous wave action is the concept that gravity waves are continuous waves emanating from a particle and being received by a particle. The particle though is particular, and can only add or remove energy in quantum increments.
The article and my comments go on, but this is enough to give people an opportunity to discuss science topics instead of just their mutual disdain.
Read this again https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment#de_Broglie.27s_wave_mechanics. It's not speculative. It's beyond speculation. You have Nobel Laureates stating space is like a piece of window glass. You have the walking droplets section which is showing de Broglie's pilot wave at the macroscopic level. You have Aephraim Steinberg discussing the current state of quantum mechanics with terms like "brainwashing" where asking where the particle is in a double slit experiment is "immoral" and that physicists have lost their ability to use their "common sense" to understand what occurs in a double slit experiment.
A moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave. In a double slit experiment the particle travels through a single slit and the associated wave in the aether passes through both.
The above sentence is not speculative. The above sentence is the most correct explanation as to what occurs physically in nature in a double slit experiment to date.
