Namo Buddhaya!
I think that learning about diffraction of light is a good way to show the realists that their model is incomplete because one can show what they think is impossible and essentially a miracle to them.
This is important because consider this.
One is 7 years old, then asks around ‘what after death?’
To him Adult1 (annihilationist/direct or indirect realist) explains
There is ‘nothing’ after death, like before you were born. You are looking through your eye as if looking through a window or looking at a screen. Death is your annihilation and the world will change to be without you. Miracles are impossible.
Whereas Adult2 (Eternalist/mind-only) explains
There is another life after death. You are not the body. Your body ages but not the knower, the seer, it is eternal & doesn’t age, and the after death will be as the after birth. Miracles are possible.
Suppose the child doesn’t know who to place confidence in.
But he sets up the basic qm experiments, which he can do at home
And reads up on what other people have set up
then he will be able to show the general model of adult1 as less complete than that of adult2 and so he should place confidence in that adult2 for the time being.
Therefore eternalism is rather nasty and it will take dependent origination to disprove adult2’s general model.
When I think about the relevant physics pertaining exclusively to Buddhism, rather than say both buddhism & eternalist mind models, there is no exclusive correlation that i can see. There might be but i can’t see any now.
It is because buddhism goes way further in adding dependent origination contradicting ‘eternal seer’ and further proclaiming a truth & possibility of a principial not coming into play of DO as cessation-extinguishment.