My argument is the same one that Bell, Kochen, Specker, Conway, and so many others have covered before: If photons were locally real, then we'd see different me

My argument is the same one that Bell, Kochen, Specker, Conway, and so many others have covered before: If photons were locally real, then we'd see different measurements from what we actually do see. The video covers the basic idea of witnessing this using polarizing filters, as well as explaining Bell's inequalities using basic discrete set theory and Venn diagrams. We don't have to lose reality; we could instead lose locality. However, then we also lose most of physical causality and spatial relevance. [0] covers all of the material but takes more than 20min to read. At the end of it, we're left with a very weak theory that has trouble ruling out FTL influences. On the second point, it doesn't particularly matter whether those natural laws exist; my point was that they're not fully knowable. There's no reason why the universe ought to admit a short legible encoding of its own structure, especially considering that such structure ought not be observable by creatures like us residing in the universe. Rather than knowing the natural laws, we know predictive models which are good approximations. There is fundamental uncertainty preventing our approximations from sharpening to some arbitrarily fine precision. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_nonlocality https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_nonlocality