The specialization in science can drive us to the loss of the whole vision of things.
And this seems to be the current state in the Quantum Mechanics scientists.
To explain this problem, I try to expose some philosophy and basics principles about the consistent and peculiarities of mathematics.
The first question would be to revise the nature, reach and meaning of mathematics.

Mathematics is ALONE an expression language, say, a form of expression of physical problems using the number as base, while the speaking (or latter) language is a method of expression that use of the letter as base.
But the important question is that so much letter language as number or mathematics language alone are useful to express things, but they by themselves aren't the things.
If I say: "this apple is green", really I don't have creating an apple, neither colouring an apple, I'm alone expressing that there is an apple there.
Although I could be wrong if what it is in front of me is a pear.
So, the expression method can be wrong and give us fail solutions, and so, the expression of a thing never is guarantee of its authenticity.
Say, any expression could be true of false, and for proving its veracity we must to observe, study and corroborate that the expression is consequent with the physical reality of the event or thing.
But what occurs with the mathematical language and expression?
Because the same thing.
One mathematical expression or adjust could be true or false, and so, we have to prove its veracity with the observation and study of the physical element or event that we have expressing or adjusting.

For example: If I say the area of a square is (L^2, the side to the square) then with this expression I don't create any square or make that the whole Universe is full of squares, neither that when putting the waves function, immediately the Universe is full of particles.
In the same way, if what I say is that the area of a square is the cube of its side (L^3), then I'm wrong and the expression is erroneous.
Say, any mathematical expression has not any guarantee of being correct without a correct corroboration.

And in this question is where the Quantum Mechanics, and mainly its scientists, fail.
The Quantum Mechanics scientists believe that its mathematical formulas are methods of creation, not of expression, and all what they think and deduce mathematically is a true physical creation.
Later on, if their formulas go against the well-known physical laws, then they say that is these physical rules are the ones that are wrong, or that they aren't complete in this or that sides.
If it is necessary to lie or make confuse of manipulated proofs for try demonstrating the value of the QM, they proceed to these false or confuse proofs to complete their necessities.
Example of this is the core proof for the QM, say, the double slit experiment.
This proof, made correctly, say us that the light and particles are corpuscular particles not waves.
But the QM uses of confuse of partial proofs to asseverate the true of its formulas.
In the other hand, the necessary proving of the veracity of the QM formulas never is made, neither the logical comprehension of the same ones.
Alone the QM has to be accepted by the fact of being many mathematical formulas.
Doesn't care to be expression methods, they have to be seen as authentic physical creations.

Of course, with this procedure and lack of physical rigor and content, the results could be extremely stupid or ridiculous, as for example can be the distribution of electrons in atoms that is a true attack to the human intelligence.

In such a cases, we can concluding saying:
1.- The quantum scientists don't live in the physical world, but in their mental allegoric confusions.
2.- Any resemblance to reality is simply coincidental

Friends, this is a simple but harsh criticism of the current state of science, therefore whoever is a lover and follower of current scientific conclusions, would be better not reading the article.
My apologies to them.
-----------
I understand that physical, cosmological, quantum science, etc. current is based on completely erroneous theories and models, something that perhaps always happened.
The current problem, which is when contradictions are found, we close our intelligence and comprehension capacity; we make these theories annul and replace it, and of course, we no longer stop having in our minds and brains the critical capacity for deduction and discussion, which has been replaced by "implantations of wrong cosmic models".
It does not matter that by analyzing the issues raised, but seeing that they do not coincide with physical logic and that they contradict the observed and deduced reality: We only dare to think "When the great scientists of our time defend it that way, then it will be so; who am I to think otherwise": But worse still, I would also be ostracized and ridiculed if I discuss these issues.
Simple notes on some of these incongruous theories or models:
-- Uncertainty Principle:
We all know that the momentum of a particle is measured there, on its position, and by the observation of its position changes over time (velocity). And that equally its mass is measured in its position and by its inertia to the change of position. Then Ix. Ip = f(h) is incongruent.
Daily demonstrated in particle accelerators: "The more accurately its position and position changes are measured, the more accurately the energy, mass, and momentum of the particles are measured."
-- Higgs' Boson:
It is not possible that a particle of an infinitesimal existence, and only achieved in particle accelerators, can give mass to the entire universe.
--Black holes:
Multiple black holes are seen every day, (in the minds of its visionaries, of course) because despite intensely searching for them with powerful means of observation, only three rotating lights have been seen that are said to be a black hole.
Etc.

Thank all you.