Good for you. But you are not a physicist?

Parsing word choice as a point in argument is a rhetorical game, so far as I am concerned, and I have experienced a lot of argument in my life.

I've read of Tesla. I admire him. I think he was on to things that we have not followed. I think his turbine concept was very inventive and possibly a good fit for rocket turbopumps (simple, light). But there is no indication he knew of quantum theory. And it still follows that if you talk about "vibrations," there must be something that vibrates. The search for more particles? It's like the search for more elements. You will get temporary mash-ups based on the energy of the collision, things of momentary stability. You will be lucky to measure their evanescent lives. The fact that we can talk about "particle physicists" is a clue that this whole direction of research has ossified, as though there were no other physics.

So, if you think there is something from Tesla, bring it out for consideration. The inability of people to put their position on the table is a bad trait on this site.