[dr_lew]

There is no wave-particle duality, there are only waves that sometimes appear to us to behave as particles.

Well I say, there are only particles which sometimes appear to us to behave as waves! How about that!

[Boogieman]

It’s an untenable proposition.

I can easily posit a physical model to explain how a wave can appear to be a particle (in fact, those models already exist), but there is no sensible way for you to posit a model to explain how a true particle could appear to be a wave. The best and brightest minds for over a century have tried, and the best they came up with was “well, it changes into a particle if we happen to be looking at it, then it stops when we look away”, and that is not behavior that would be compatible with these things actually being particles.

[who_would_fardels_bear]

There's this interesting (but ultimately disturbing) talk by one of today's great experimentalists Anton Zeilinger:

Quantum Information & the Foundations of Quantum Mechanics

Evidently soon after the discovery/creation of quantum mechanics Bohr and Einstein started having arguments about what physics was all about.

Einstein said it was about finding out what actually exists.

Bohr held that it was about finding out what can be said.

We may be forever denied the ability to actually know what the universe is made of, but even Zeilinger who seemed to lean toward Bohr's answer held out hope that Einstein might ultimately be found to be right.