This paper is a critical discussion of a recent article by Bas van Fraassen (1985) in which he suggests the following view: we should admit that we have no explanation of the EPR correlations, but refuse to consider the correlations as mysterious nevertheless (pp. 126–128). We shall focus on just three of the claims made by van Fraassen in support of this view. The three claims are these: (1) The EPR correlations cannot be explained by signals being transmitted from one component of an EPR compound to the other (pp. 114–115). (2) There is, in the EPR situation, no empirically verifiable action at a distance (pp. 124–126). (3) The demand for an explanation of the EPR correlations is similar to the Aristotelian demand of the post-Newtonian proponents of the law of inertia to explain what keeps a body moving if there are no forces impressed on it (pp. 126–128).
In order to have a chance to make a real quantum computer it is important to find the entanglement phenomenon on mesoscopic level since technology can not be able in the visible future to work on atomic level. It is known that the entanglement (the EPR correlation) violates the principle of local realism. Existence of EPR correlation on a level higher than atomic one violates both local and macroscopic realism. In order to clear possibility of this violation the fundamental difference between applications of the principles of quantum mechanics on atomic and higher level is considered. Mysterious nature of some macroscopic quantum phenomena is accentuated. Experimental verification of the entanglement possibility in superconductor structure is proposed.