I, as one of those people, think it's that others often misunderstand the balance of evidence. Most often it's not "A, but it could be B, let's discuss" - it's "A, and unless multiple miracles in a row have happened everywhere every millisecond to explain why in all of human history we've seen A when B was actually the case, B is excluded". Or sometimes it's "A and B are both different wordings describing the exact same predictions". Laymen confuse things so much it's often difficult to determine which one it is. That's all once you have discussed things a bit and clarified - to begin with, most of the time it's just "A and B are both fanciful ideas journalists made up and actual professional philosophers somehow confused for real physics". It gets annoying.
In this case, regarding "spooky action at a distance" etc.: nothing about it is new science, nothing is "interesting" (something you'd see in the frontiers), nothing is controversial or unexplained or even hard to communicate - it's all undergrad stuff taught to undergrads for over half a century now. Anyone with actual knowledge is not eager to demonstrate having it, they're just sick of it by now.
bildramer t1_irnuucr wrote
Reply to comment by JoTheRenunciant in Quantum philosophy: 4 ways physics will challenge your reality by ADefiniteDescription
I, as one of those people, think it's that others often misunderstand the balance of evidence. Most often it's not "A, but it could be B, let's discuss" - it's "A, and unless multiple miracles in a row have happened everywhere every millisecond to explain why in all of human history we've seen A when B was actually the case, B is excluded". Or sometimes it's "A and B are both different wordings describing the exact same predictions". Laymen confuse things so much it's often difficult to determine which one it is. That's all once you have discussed things a bit and clarified - to begin with, most of the time it's just "A and B are both fanciful ideas journalists made up and actual professional philosophers somehow confused for real physics". It gets annoying.
In this case, regarding "spooky action at a distance" etc.: nothing about it is new science, nothing is "interesting" (something you'd see in the frontiers), nothing is controversial or unexplained or even hard to communicate - it's all undergrad stuff taught to undergrads for over half a century now. Anyone with actual knowledge is not eager to demonstrate having it, they're just sick of it by now.