Many "N95" masks have a one-way valve so you can breathe out unimpeded.

I didn't say there was no such thing as a mask that could block a virus, at least somewhat. A hasmat suit is pretty good at it. If we really wanted to stop viral transmission we would all walk around in gear like that. I am talking about surgical masks, or any of the other masks that are used by most people (and recommended to be used). As for N95, they still aren't perfect barriers, but even in where they do work, they only work in one direction. So unless everyone on the planet is using N95 (a new one every day, since sterility is essential) then they are also useless for population level reduction in viral transmission.

The water droplets are absorbed or adsorbed by the mask fibers and evaporate. What happens to the million viruses that were in each droplet then?

Who said there are millions of viruses in each water droplet? Where is the evidence to support that?

Even if that is true, there is no evidence to support the assertion that THOSE virus particles are the ones that are the primary spreaders of these particular viruses between people. There is literally ZERO evidence to support that assertion. It is a story, without evidence, that everyone believes.

The only scientific endeavor that tests mask effectiveness of reducing actual viral spreading (among people) is the paper I linked above. There is one other paper that tested viral transmission through masks by measuring incident viruses on a measuring device. It found no evidence for any reduction for cloth masks, and a 50% or so reduction for N95 masks. I can't find that paper in my notes at the moment, so take that with a grain of salt.

The point is, all studies that support the theory that are espoused as canon are not measuring the premise (that the virus is transmitted through LARGER droplets), but are taking the premise on faith, and measuring upstream consequences of the premise.