I haven't seen anything revelationary in this thread about quantum entanglement, and I have yet to see the point of discussing what Einstein meant when he used the word "spooky". I think where that one is concerned, one should consider the translation from German and what the ambit of such a term is in its native context. Quantum weirdness is nowadays ubiquitous, the poster child has to be interference patterns in double slit experiments. What do these experiments and their real-time and real-space 'patterns' tell us about the nature of (quantum) space and time? Why pick apart a theory and its underlying structure--Minkowski spacetime--when it's a perfectly good theory, and again, what does the theory tell us about the nature of space and time? Is there, in other words, a mathematical "reality" which is otherwise indistinguishable from physics? Apparently there are good arguments for this point of view (viz, Penrose, Hawking, Maldacena et al)--the nature of space and time isn't weird, it's mathematical and mathematics isn't weird (unless you don't understand it). It looks like the answer to the last question has been answered (Elvis has left the building); if we want to know why, or even, why is it that we ask the questions about space and time--why does it look spooky--that seems to be a different domain, metaphysics and speculation about the nature of human existence, something "beyond mere evolution", perhaps, a special role we are playing, perhaps . . . The "time is absolute" idea does seem to fit quantum mechanics better than relative time does, yes. Time is linear in quantum systems--so is measurement; it just is, and there is no "why". But consider that measurement of the speed of light is always in the same quantum domain (of course). That's a fairly strong connection.