re: “QM / schrodinger’s wave function doesn’t say a particle is distributed over two or more Locations or states. Rather, it gives us the range of locations or states where we can expect to find the particle “
QM is mistaken in that assumption. It assumes the electron is a particle, and this is flat-out wrong.
THAT’s what has put QM on the wrong track 100 yrs (or so) ago.
Electrons are particles and waves depending if the wave function is collapsed just like photons.
Well, QM talks about wave- like and particle- like properties — as seen from our macro- scale, world experience these are constructs with different qualities. And it’s often convenient to call a quantum level identity a “particle” or a “wave” from our POV when we observe the characteristic qualities in “it”. But as you can see perhaps from the frequent references to “wave- particle duality at the quantum level,” these terms are just crude applications from our macro frame of reference to the micro- quantum world— these terms help us discuss the quantum level but they can also get in the way, indeed we can trip over them. I see QM as not specifying that a quantum phenomenon IS a particle as we would see, say, a physical ball or grain of sand. Rather. QM only uses that terminology to identify some, not all, aspects of the quantum phenomenon in language we can identify with. The fact that quantum phenomenon also exhibit wave- type properties should alert us that they aren’t just particles or Little Rockks. I believe QM just doesn’t say that, despite the commonplace that it does.