"Quantum measurement predictions are consistent with relativity for macroscopic observations, but there is no consensus on how to explain this consistency in fundamental terms. The prevailing assumption is that the relativistic structure of spacetime should provide the framework for any microphysical account. This bias is due, in large part, to our intuitions about local causality, the idea that all physical processes propagate through space in a continuous manner. I argue that relativity is not a guarantor of local causality, and is not about ontological features of spacetime. It is, rather, an expression of the observational equivalence of spacetime descriptions of physical processes. This observational equivalence is due to the essentially probabilistic nature of quantum theory." http://www.fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1340 (Intro and Discussion) http://www.fqxi.org/data/essay-contest-files/Gillis_Relativity_Is_Not_Ab.pdf (Paper) A fair amount of silliness regularly surfaces in the FQXi essay contests, but occasionally you find a real gem. Last time around it was David Tong's paper where the unspeakable was spoken: Contemporary physics may be basically unsimulable and uncomputable thanks to the fermion minus-sign problem. This time maybe it's this paper.