There is an ongoing PBS TV series (also several books and also a website) called "Closer To Truth". It is hosted by neuroscientist Robert Lawrence Kuhn. He's featured in one-on-one interviews and panel discussions with the cream of the cream of today's cosmologists, physicists, philosophers, theologians, psychologists, etc. on all of the Big Questions surrounding a trilogy of broad topics - Cosmos; Consciousness; God. The trilogy collectively dealt with reality, space and time, mind and consciousness, aliens, theology and on and on and on. Here are a few of my comments on one of the general topics covered: Quantum Physics.

Why is the Quantum So Strange?

One of the main reasons, IMHO, that the realm of the quantum is so very strange is that the particles that make up the realm of the micro tend to exhibit awareness and exhibit a limited degree or range of free will! That's nuts! But, consider just one example (out of many I could give). That example is radioactive decay. Now the standard scenario given in the textbooks is that some atomic nuclei are unstable and thus are radioactive. They tend to 'want' to achieve stability, and thus go poof and emit various bits and pieces which results in what is left over as something that is stable. Now unstable nuclei go poof entirely at random. Take two identical radioactive atoms sitting side by side - one might go poof in a matter of seconds while the other, that identical other, might not go poof for many days, weeks or even millennia. The next aspect is that unstable nuclei go poof for absolutely no reason at all. Causality does not apply in radioactive decay (that's also nuts, IMHO but I digress). The upshot of all of this randomness and lack of causality is that unstable nuclei go poof in such a structured or organised way as to decay in a precise mathematical manner which we measure and term the half-life of that particular kind of unstable nuclei. Now, I ask you, if you were to take a random number generator to determine the time lag between one unstable nuclei going poof and the next; if you were to take another random number generator to determine how many unstable nuclei were to go poof after that time lag, do you think you would come up with, if you graphed the results, a precise mathematical relationship - a half-life relationship? The odds are highly against such a scenario. Since the half-life relationship is well established, something is screwy somewhere with either the randomness or the causality. Now I suspect that the unstable nuclei has an awareness and a limited range quantum ai uk  of free will options and that it can of that own free will 'decide' when to go poof in conjunction with all of the other unstable nuclei in order to maintain or to arrive at that half-life relationship. That's also nuts. Perhaps the ultimate solution lies in the Simulated (Virtual Reality) Universe scenario where it's all been so programmed to produce the results that we see and thus randomness does not operate and causality does via that programming.

Why is the Quantum so Mysterious?

One of the main reasons we find quantum physics strange or mysterious is because quantum physics tends to be expressed or described in terms of probability. In our day-to-day macro world, certainty tends to be the norm. The cat is either alive or it is dead. However, the interesting thing I note in any description of quantum phenomena, is that things are uncertain and thus only probable to an observer, or if someone is trying to measure something. The observer is the key element. Quantum physics is described in probabilities by an observer. Now, probability is of course just a form of mathematics and mathematics is an invention or an abstract concept that exists within the mind. Probability is not a thing but a concept and it has no external reality. You measure or observe things and then mentally assign probability to what you observe or measure. They are called 'error bars' if nothing else. There are limits to how accurately you can observe or measure things, and that's because the very act of observing or measuring affects what it is you are observing or measuring. So far, so good. But I noted above that the observer is the key element to defining quantum physics as a probabilistic physics. Now what happens if you remove the observer (and the mental concept of probability) from the picture? There was a time post Big Bang when there was no life, no mind, no observer. Could you still say the realm of the micro was probabilistic if there were no observers around to assign probabilities? Humans may not know exactly where that damn electron is, but Mother Nature does! In fact, more likely as not, the electron 'knows' as well, but that's another topic.