You don't seem to have a very good grasp of this subject and don't appear to have read the article very carefully. The only viable alternative to PCM is DSD, which failed to gain any traction for good reasons. So for all practical purposes, sampling and PCM are the same thing. You also throw in Fourier (not Fournier) transformation for good measure, which is relevant to additive synthesis, but not to granular synthesis, which is the topic of this article.
> I don't agree with the statement that shortnening the "sound" changes pitch. It depends on your representation of the sound. If you represent it as a function of amplitude vs time then scaling the time axis does change pitch.
The only relevant "representation" is digital audio, which by definition is encoded as amplitude over time regardless of encoding technique. To lengthen time without changing pitch or pitch without changing time requires manipulation of the audio data. That manipulation is either done by granular synthesis, or by utilizing a Fast Fourier Transform to decompose the audio into its component waveforms, changing the frequencies or shortening the wave components, and recomposing them back to a composite waveform. This article is about granular synthesis, which requires far less computation than FFT.
> No instrument plays sound faster or slower to make it shorter or longer....
Irrelevant. We aren't dealing with physical instruments, but with digital audio.
There is nothing in the least fallacious or sensational about this article.