Thanks for your patience. I take it that I have misunderstood the paper, using the language and intuition of the classical world and applying it to the quantum world. I thought he was saying that interference can be explained by a 'model in which a "particle" is a little tiny ball flying through...
That's helpful. But that's also my question. Is this paper claiming that this isn't true: "The double slit experiment does prove that waves are an essential part of the physics of quantum objects." That an interference pattern can be explained completely by the behavior of particles?
Thanks for the reference. I wonder if I am misinterpreting the point of this paper; I am barely literate in math and physics, but I have read popular treatments of quantum theory for interested laypersons by Brian Greene and Ghirardi among others, and my impression was that an interference...
Is one particle detected on the detection screen for each particle shot in a double slit experiment? Or do some particles fail to be detected because they hit the barrier in between the two slits? In other words, is there an exact one to one correspondence of particles shot to particles...