Hi SG, two points regarding your post that may sound a bit negative but they're really there to spark discussion on how we appraoch this whole area... let me know what you think.
1) I think you've introduced a bit of confusion with your negative probabilities by (unintentionally) suggesting that a specific path can be associated with a -ve prob. I bring forth dogrelate as my first evidence
I must admit I've never liked the "classicalisation" explanations of quantum phenomena (look what happens to this *particle* or consider this *path*) as they perpetuate much of the voodoo nonsense. Quantum behaviour is fascinating but it quickly leads down the road to the confusion we often see expressed by certain individuals here at EvC.
The truth is that classical behaviour is the weird stuff, and quantum the mundane. The fact that a classical regime emerges is what amazes me. And trying to explain the quantum world by reference to the classical is like explaining the chemistry of liquid water by reference to oceanic currents. But can we do better?
2) Now I do like your write up of Zeno freezing... very nice. However, you're sort of playing the magician:
So I've managed to stop an atom from decaying by not interacting with it, in other words, by doing nothing to it.
Flourish, take a bow, curtsy from your beautiful assistant, rapturous applause from the thoroughly baffled and now slightly even more ignorant audiance
I think us physicists are so guilty of turning physics into magic just to persuade the masses that it is exciting. I do it all the time...
Think of how you used to view black holes as these truly mystical objects, baffling beyond belief in terms of their ability to screw around with space and time. And then you saw the simplicity of Schwarzschild... were you disappointed or blown away by the elegance and beauty? It is that elegance and beauty I wish we could express better... but could we make anyone else appreciate it?