Today Quantum mechanics is "non-mechanical" theory.

Today Quantum mechanics is “non-mechanical” theory.
Why?
Because Classic Mechanics deals with objects that have real
physical parameters : size, volume, geometrical forms and
QM doesn’t have real particles. In QM we are missed geometrical
form of quantum particle.
Real quantum particle cannot be a “point”.
Real quantum particle cannot be a “firm golf-ball” ( forbidden by SRT)
Using models like “point-particle” or “firm golf-ball”, we cannot describe
QM in mechanical terms.
One can adopt QM “visually” only understanding the mechanical model
of quantum particle (!) . . . … . and then giving forces to it . . .
. . . . . see how this model works mechanically . . .
. . . . and what is result of its mechanical behavior.
Once again.
QM is very practical theory and therefore it cannot be paradoxical.
Its interpretation must be realistic. The best realistic way is
to observe quantum particle as a simple mechanical object which
somehow can produce quantum electrical (EM) effects.
==…
Einstein wrote:
“Some physicists, among whom I am myself can not believe
that we should once and for all abandon the idea of direct
images of physical reality in space and time, or that we should
agree with the opinion that a phenomenon in nature like a game case.”
/Einstein/
How is it possible to see / to image geometrical form of quantum particle “direct”?
In my opinion there is only one way to see / to image geometrical form
of quantum particle “direct”: we need to observe quantum particle in
its own-native reference frame – zero vacuum T=0K.
==…

I’m curious. Why do you post these things in a forum that’s obviously not appropriate for the content? Why not post to a physics forum where professional physicists can offer feedback?

" The mathematics of QM is straightforward, but making the
connection between the mathematics and an intuitive picture
of the physical world is very hard"
/ Claude N. Cohen-Tannoudji . Nobel Prize in Physics 1997 /
==…
The probabilistic solution of QM is only a top of an iceberg,
the biggest part of this iceberg – the quantum deterministic
process is hidden under the Dirac’s “sea of vacuum”.
==…

Sorry, Cuthbert. Apparently Socratus hasn’t the vaguest idea of the existence of other people as indicated by his complete lack of response to your question. :lol:
Occam

Sorry, Cuthbert.
Apparently Socratus hasn’t the vaguest idea of the existence of other people
as indicated by his complete lack of response to your question. :lol:
Occam

Dear Moderator Occam
Do you answer to every replica ?
All the best
socratus

Dear original poster whose username I’m reluctant to use since it references a great philosopher,
Answer my question.

It’s possibly best if we all just put him on ignore. That way his ramblings don’t clutter our forum. :lol:
Occam