Did Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle Impact Foundational Concepts Unfavorably, by Displacing a Standing Wave Model for the Electron?

Heisenberg's succeeded in inducing Schr\"{o}dinger to recant his standing wave model for the electron. They subsequently successively received Nobel awards. On August 30, 2007, David Mc Leod stated: ``Dad, while I was learning high school chemistry, and was being taught the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, I said to myself, `This is BS!''' Son and ``Dad'' had been discussing their traveling wave/standing wave, TW/SW, model for the electron. Dave had discussed, in the context of beta decay, how an electron and an antineutrino were emitted together. Dave then said, ``An electron is an antiparticle.'' Because, a ``string-like'' electron had to have been a segment ``cut out of'' one of our neutron-string models. It had to have antinodes at either free end. One end, modeled as a transversely vibrating entity, had to ``eject'' the occupant for the loop to close. The TW/SW model cannot be a point or particle. De Broglie is correct, but The Principle should be recast: It is philosophically unsound. Quantum Mechanics, and String theory, could be foundational beneficiaries. Schr\"{o}dinger seems incomplete.