Due to its experimental success, Einstein’s battle against Quantum Mechanics is seemingly lost. However, the acceptance that Nature can be random at the moment of measurement brings a strange implication on the character of Nature, being undetermined at the measurement moment, while keeping determined before and after it [1]. If real, this selective undetermination would represent either an inconsistency of Nature itself (since the act of measurement is not special, just another physical interaction), or more probably, the inconsistency of our system of understanding it (Science). In both cases, the consequence is fatal for our endeavour of searching reasonable causes thereafter, either if the world is essentially random and there are not such reasonable causes, or if our system of understanding is constructed under that premise.

Einstein’s world, instead, is comprehensible, and that is the basis of my defence of his point of view. Science is not a historical accident, it did not arise by chance, but as a consequence of the intelligent nature of the human being. The human being, as an intelligent one, needs to understand, even if the world is not understandable. The reason is the basis of our scientific search, and the belief that there is something understandable behind any natural phenomenon is the motor of its progress. Rather and beyond the determinism implied by Einstein’s view, it is the comprehensibility premise which is fundamental for Science. Otherwise, our scientific endeavour in search of understandable causes dramatically collapses in the absurd, when we accept that the world is essentially random and that there are no such understandable causes to be looked for.

Recent experimental results, though, have confirmed the existence of pure random atomic jumps induced by measurement, revealing a Universe more unattainable and incomprehensible of what we expected [2-3]. Faced with this dilemma, I still would incline the balance to the side of comprehensibility, which drives/condemns us to an everlasting search of a more and more subtle causality underneath the apparent quantum randomness.

1. R. PENROSE, “The Emperor’s New Mind”, Oxford Univ. Press., 1990.

2. J. S. BELL, “Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics”, Cambridge University Press, 1987.

3. K. GOTTFRIED, “Does Quantum Mechanics carry the seeds of its own destruction”, Physics World, pp. 34-40, October, 1991.