But if you think of them as the waves, any kind of close and stable wave superposition can be called "a particle". At some point, we might just drop the "particle world" and go with the "quantum systems".

Most people have an intuition about particles, they don’t have an intuition for quantum systems.

I wanted to highlight for a general reader that anyons are not particle in the sense of common intuition.

Protons, which the article brings as an example of collective phenomenona, roughly follow a lot of “particle intuition.”

Here is a link to the quasiparticles Wikipedia page that may be helpful. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quasiparticle

Personally, I don’t mind if folks reify these things to make it easier to follow, fwiw.

I wonder whether we could change school curricula so that people develop an intuition about quantum systems instead. I my schooling I learned almost exclusively particle abstractions. It's only natural that I'm more comfortable with particles.

> Most people have an intuition about particles

That intuition is also most likely completely wrong.

In this case, electric current is NOT carried by electrons.

Electrons in a material are effective particles, with a different mass, vide https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effective_mass_(solid-state_ph....

Partice != fundamental particle.