It is not bizarre; it is being presented as such, though. The actual mathematics of quantum mechanics is simple (vectors, matrices). What is confusing is:

- trying to describe quantum mechanics without mathematics (since we have no direct intuition/experience, many analogies do not hold),

- inventing some profound philosophy to describe facts.

For example, my entry on that: https://johncarlosbaez.wordpress.com/2015/03/13/quantum-supe... (not entanglement, but - an electron being in two places at once).

[Full disclaimer: I am an ex theoretical physicist. I don't claim I am sane, though.]

It's not bizarre if you skip the tricky bits like how does it work, why don't the equations work for gravity, are there many worlds and so on.

>[Full disclaimer: I am an ex theoretical physicist. I don't claim I am sane, though.]

You sound sane :)

It looks bizarre because we are looking at it through our current paradigm, we need to change our view of the universe and probably ourselves to understand it and it will stop looking bizarre.

Quantum mechanics understanding will probably be a scientific revolution, something comparable to understanding the earth is round or the sun does not circle earth.

There are a few scientist that are trying to break the old model of thinking.

http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/1714898-breaking-through-con...

If you really want to understand quantum mechanics in an intuitive sense (i.e. enough to understand why it works, but not really enough to generate your own robust predictions at a very granular level) I recommend http://lesswrong.com/lw/r5/the_quantum_physics_sequence/

There is a (subtly, and not in a terribly important way) flawed conclusion regarding personal identity toward the end, and parts of it are a bit long-winded (I guess esp if you don't already enjoy reading Yudkowsky as I do), but it is solid.

tl;dr: QM's reputation is more a function of it being poorly taught (cf this article), not really the theory itself - ultimately it makes the world less confusing, as any sound scientific theory should.

I'm not sure it's more bizarre than, say, matter being made up of atoms. As others have said, it tends to be taught in an overly confusing way - perhaps intentionally so. This article is a decent example of that.

It is very odd but the psychological take on that is very much down to the individual. If everything was Newtonian determinism it would be rather dull. Behaviour that is so mysterious we can't really understand it is quite interesting.

Isn't that thought only thinkable if you believe the human brain is the best possible apparatus available for comprehending the universe? Something bigger and better may have a different view.

I'm pretty sure we can say with near certainty that any intelligence that has a) evolved, and b) exists on a macro-scale, will also have problems comprehending quantum theory.