A Mess called Quantum Mechanics

After 4 years of contemplation I can now officially declare that I no longer consider Quantum Mechanics in any seriousness with regard to ontology (reality and truth). 

Just to show its contingency I have been trying to publish a work that I first [here] considered of so little value that did not have the motivation to write it explicitly. 

My main reason is that the theory does not even have clear definitions to begin with! There are at least three different ways to define the quantum-mechanical momentum, first being the orthodox definition using linear self-adjoint operators $$\boxed{p_\mu=i\hbar\partial_\mu}$$ This definition has occupied theoretical physics and 99% of physicists working on (foundations of) quantum mechanics since 1926, when Schrödinger, led by the strong fashion of the time to explain discrete atomic spectra, thought that the natural mathematical implementation of these discrete radiation packets is done via eigenvalues, and since then the academic sheep could only follow suit.

From the conservation of probability $$\frac{\partial |\psi|^2}{\partial t}+\nabla\cdot\left(|\psi|^2 \frac{\nabla S}{m}\right)=0,$$ (that can be derived from the Schrödinger equation) one is led to another expression for the quantum-mechanical momentum, i.e. $$\textbf{p}=\nabla S,$$ which in terms of the wavefunction is $$\textbf{p}=\hbar\Im\frac{\nabla\psi}{\psi}.$$ Theoretically there is no reason why one should neglect the real part and ruin the structure of complex numbers by only considering the imaginary part. This has been my little contribution: I do not throw the real part away and define $$\boxed{p_\mu=i\hbar\frac{\partial_\mu\psi}{\psi}}$$ This allows to arrive at nonlinear generalizations of Schrödinger and Klein-Gordon equations that unlike orthodox quantum mechanics (and Bohmian mechanics) also allow for compressible Madelung fluids. 

In 1952 Schrödinger proposed a gauge transformation, without realizing that it is in fact using another definition for momentum!, viz. $$\boxed{p_\mu=\frac{i\hbar}{2}\partial_\mu\log\frac{\psi}{\psi^*}}$$ I realized this only yesterday from Vedral's note. 

You can check for yourself that using a simple plane wave $$\psi=e^{ik_\nu x^\nu}$$ all these expressions give the four-wavevector (hence momentum using de Broglie's hypothesis). But which one is the definition? How can we find out when theoretical physics has never considered these possibilities? 

This is why I cannot anymore continue thinking about anything that involves quantum mechanics and have the least sympathy for any theory (including all the current attempts of quantum gravity) that takes it seriously. They might achieve some results --like QFT-- but they will never have any significant consequence for our understanding of reality. 

So, what is to be done? Both aesthetically and according to our experience in history of physics, when something becomes so ambiguous, the solution is to leave it altogether and look for a totally new ground, one that does not borrow any of the key constituents of the messy theory. That is what I have tried to do here and here.