Quant said:
DSE was evidence for corposcular+wavelike nature of light
Not in the 1920s, it wasn't. The DSE wasn't evidence for light quanta (photons) until it was possible to do it with a light source of low enough intensity that single photon impacts could be observed on the detector. That wasn't done until the 1980s.
Quant said:
which promped de Broglie to introduce material waves.
QM had already started well before that, with Planck's model for black body radiation in 1900, followed by Einstein's model of the photoelectric effect in 1905, and then the Bohr-Sommerfeld model of the hydrogen atom in, IIRC, 1913.
Also, when de Broglie proposed his hypothesis, he did not reference the DSE as evidence for the corpuscular nature of light (because at the time it wasn't--see above), he referenced Einstein's model of the photoelectric effect in 1905.
Quant said:
Feynman said that the only mistery of QM is the DSE.
He said the DSE, if you do it in a way that allows single photon detections,
illustrates the central mystery of QM. He never said it was the
only such experiment.
Quant said:
Look at my response to Vanadium.
Your response had nothing to do with the claim of yours that I asked about. The fact that there is no single generally accepted interpretation of QM has nothing to do with QM's ability to make accurate predictions, which is all that is required for the DSE, or anything else, to be "solved". Nature doesn't care whether humans have an interpretation of QM, or any other model, that we like. Nature only cares whether our models make accurate predictions.
Quant said:
You can now close the thread.
Done.