No Nobel Prizes to Theoretical Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity!

Here is a perspective on the previous post:

Let us consider how the Nobel Committee has awarded work of major theoretical nature on Quantum Mechanics as the foundation of modern physics: 

1932 Werner Heisenberg: Matrix mechanics, 1933 Erwin Schrödinger: Schrödinger wave equation, 1933 Paul Dirac: Dirac equation = Relativistic wave equation, 1954 Max Born: Statistical interpretation of wave function, which can be complemented with very preliminary  1918 Max Planck: Quantum of energy/action $h\nu$ 1921 Albert Einstein: Quantum of light $h\nu$ = photon. There are several Prizes to experimental work connecting to "quantum",  but none to any of the fundamentally different interpretations seeking to specify the physical meaning of Schrödinger/Dirac wave equation and wave functions including: Copenhagen Bohr-Born-Heisenberg 1927, Bohmian mechanics 1952, Many-Worlds 1957, Collapse Models 1990-2000. This means that through the 100 years history of QM as the foundation of modern physics, the physical meaning of the theory is still completely open. The common agreement is that "QM works" exceedingly well, so amazingly well that there not a single experiment not in full agreement with QM, while it is also agreed that "nobody knows why". None of the above interpretations has shown to be worthy of a prize, indicating that they are all wrong.  So the last time a Prize was awarded to QM including theory, was to Born in 1954 for his statistical interpretation in 1927, while this was the reason he was left out in 1932-33.  Modern physics is based on the theories of QM + General Relativity GR. It is very remarkable that no Prize has been given to a discovery of the physical meaning of either the "quantum" of QM or the "curved space-time" of GR.  It is natural to connect the present crisis of theoretical physics to a growing feeling of lack credibility coming from lack of Prize to theory over a very long time.  Recall also that an experiment without theory is blind. An experiment must be interpreted to have a meaning. A number or blip on a screen says nothing in itself.  Recall that all trouble comes from the generalisation of Schrödinger's equation for the Hydrogen atom with is wave function representing its one electron charge density in concrete physical terms, to atoms with more than one electron in terms of a multi-dimensional wave function without physical representation. Real Quantum Mechanics offers a different generalisation with concrete charge density representation. A Prize to RealQM is not unthinkable...