One can say that the photons just acts like ordinary people. Its probability of ending in one state (franges) depends upon:

-past history (past cone) of the photon (wow I just passed staight ahead a BS1 without deviations!)

AND

-Future events (future cone) (oohh I’ll have to pass another BS2, let me see where I can end..)

It seems more like a “complex systems ” behaviour than elementary particle one.

Beside jokes: it is a physically fully acceptable result that the probability of a final event does depends on past-cone and future-cones events that act likes “edge conditions” or “fixed points” (BS1, BS2 and Ds).

And again the esperiment is ROBUST, like all emergent phenomena, to jitters: time of arrivals, materials imperfections etc. It is just like if the BeamSplitters and detectors are just “nodal” points (in space-time) for the probability current density function of the “photon”.

At the very end quoting Feynman and Laughlin QM deals only with probability of events, NOT with wave-particle duality concepts..

May be the experiment again fits very well in the Laughlin and Voloviks framework of emergent real world experimental physics? or do you think I misunderstand something?