I noticed a while back that the purported Quantum Mechanical explanations for the Double-Slit Experiment, don’t make any sense for a very simple reason: generally, people assume the velocity of light is fixed at c. In contrast, if we assume self-interference for a photon, then the photon must (i) change direction or (ii) change velocity, or both, otherwise, there won’t be any measurable effects of self-interference, barring even more exotic assumptions.

We can rule out case (ii), since photons are generally assumed to travel at a constant velocity of c in a vacuum. However, case (i) produces exactly the same problem, since if the photon changes direction due to self-interference, then the arrival time against the screen will imply a velocity of less than c, since by definition, the photon will not have followed a straight path from the gun to the screen. This is the end of the story, and I cannot believe that no one has pointed this out before.

We can instead posit a simple explanation for the purported interference pattern: the photons scatter inside the slit (i.e., bounce around), which from our perspective is flat, but from the perspective of a photon, is instead a tunnel, since the photon (or other elementary particle) is so small. This will produce two distributions of scattering angles (one for each slit), which will overlap at certain places along the screen more than others, producing a distribution of impact points that would otherwise look like a wave interference pattern.

This is much simpler isn’t it, and clearly a better explanation than some exotic nonsense about time and other realities. That’s not how you do science. Now, it could be that there is some experiment that requires such exotic theories, but I don’t know of one, not even the Quantum Eraser Experiment. All of these experiments have simple explanations, and we’ve developed a horrible, unscientific habit, of embracing exotic explanations for basic phenomena, that is at this point suspicious, given the military and economic value of science.