Science is more than just accepting what we (experimentally) observe, since that would lead to a collection of facts rather than a theory. By looking for mechan

Science is more than just accepting what we (experimentally) observe, since that would lead to a collection of facts rather than a theory. By looking for mechanisms, underlying causes, etc. we can find simple rules to explain seemingly unconnected phenomena. No scientist expects those rules to be intuitive; that's the realm of pop-sci "quantum woo" journalism. However, we do expect those rules to be consistent. General relativity and quantum mechanics are notoriously incompatible, so all of our attempts to combine them so far have been inconsistent, either internally (ie. the maths doesn't work) or externally (ie. they're toy models which can't explain real experiments). Bell showed that entanglement cannot be explained by local hidden variables, which was thought to be inconsistent with special relativity, since it seemingly allowed particles to communicate faster than light. More recently, work on quantum computation and quantum teleportation have clarified our ideas in terms of information: the speed of light is only a limit for information, and entanglement doesn't transfer information. Explanations like many-worlds are also based around information.