Abstract
The impact of science on society does not concern only technology. It is also relevant with regard to the prevailing "mode of thought". It shapes how we see and interact with the world. In that respect, the message physicists convey to society is that it is not humanly possible to understand physics at microscopic level. Some also claim that since predictions are Ok, why bother? Somehow, we know how to handle instruments and can predict the outcome of experiments, but we don't understand why it works as it does: we know but we don't understand. In other fields of knowledge, having an accurate understanding of things is essential for progress. In physics, do we have to content ourselves with mastering the technology without understanding how the reality is? I review some of the quantum experiments, raising a number of questions and seeking new ideas to explain phenomena in a simplified way. I argue that it is possible to conceive new realist models worth exploring. Simple is frequently understood as macroscopically explainable. As classical physics, based on macroscopic assumptions, was unable to explain subatomic phenomena, simplicity was dropped in favour of other complex theories. It could be that the physical laws at microscopic level are understandable through a different type of simplicity from the macroscopic one, so that we can say: we don't know but we understand.
Aitor Elorza