  Our notions of what is physically 'real' have long been based on the idea
that the real is what is immediately apprehended, that is the local or
observable, the physically tangible, though there has always been an
alternative philosophical notion that the 'real' is some kind of ontological
structure beyond immediate apprehension, and so inaccessible through physics.
However, quantum mechanics, with its intrinsic nonlocal correlations, has
seemingly left us with a dilemma by showing that fundamental physical theories
cannot be both real and local. Reality cannot be reconstructed as a
deterministic projection from physical observations. Many people think that the
problem lies with quantum mechanics, but, in fact, it is more likely to be a
result of unrealistic expectations. We have assumed that fundamental physics
ought to be compatible with normal (macroscopic) experience. If, however, we go
beyond our current high-level physical theories to the basic elements from
which they are constructed, we see that a pattern emerges that gives us a very
different and much more coherent understanding of what is meant by physical
'reality'.
