Why shouldn’t we?
I don’t know.
Yes, you do. Unless you’re Scott Summers, you don’t project any sort of beams from your eyes. And even if you are, such beams aren’t going to do anything important at interstellar range.
Yes. A Cow cannot possible understand, or even acknowledge the quantum physics. but it exists. Hm.. but is that because we HUMANS can understand it?
I undrastand as much as a layman can about the act of observation collapsing a wave function. But I’m not buying the idea there needs to be some sort of spooky awareness that makes QM superpositions collapse into reality.
It seems to me, and the evidence, we’re missing something fundamental. Clearly the evidence suggests the weirdness of this phenomenon, and I think these sort of things that are seen in the lab are because we have to run the experiment through and extra step of detection. My gut tells me it’s an illusion of sorts because we can’t see what the bigger picture is yet that will explain it.
It’ll take the same amount of effort to convince me there needs to always be a subjective “eyeball” bringing reality into existence as it will to convince me God was necessary to create the universe.
I wouldn’t pooh-pooh the role of conicousness completely. Rather than giving conciousness some special or magical property I would say we are concious beings (Republicans excepted) and is not suprising that we may (all be it inadverently) tailor our description of physical laws to conciousness.
For example take the many worlds interpretation, in it the physical structure which we presume that describes the state of our conciousness is not described at the level of the universal wavefunction, instead it’s described at level of only a small part of that wavefunction which is trimmed in to it’s own ‘world’ by einselection. Is it not suprising that we choose to describe the World at the same level as which the physical structure representing our conciousness excists even though einselction is an emergant property of large quantum systems? In this way it’s not suprising that what consitutes a measurement is the same as the information that can be recovered by a concious being.
Perhaps flies think that there are at least 64 universes, as that’s probably how many they can see at once. 
Because there is no reason to think that the evolutionary forces that shaped our brains would have shaped them in such a way as to make that possible.
And yet we’ve been able to come so far as to pry up many aspects of the nature of the universe evolution hasn’t necessarily shaped us for. I don’t think I need to provide examples here, as it’s plenty obvious.
Sure, I believe our intellect isn’t infinite it what it can comprehend, but we don’t know what that limit is. We could be fortunate enough that the fundamental fabric of the universe might just be within our reach to tease apart, but clearly, we have a ways to go.
Don’t get me wrong. I’m not asserting that we can’t. I’m saying I see no reason to assume that we can, and many reasons to suspect we can’t.
Conceded.
Oh man, we’re never going to stop trying though. 
My wife seems to project beams from her eyes, and lest I be in her direct path, I fear for those creatures, lightyears away, who might find themselves in its path.
So, the universe has been composed of quarks, in a self expanding n dimensional reality since we first understood particle physics, and cosmology with the Standard Model.
So where did all the turtles and crystaline spheres go?
Tris
What do you think all those quarks and n-dimensional realities are standing on?
Except, there’s no such thing as crystalline spheres… that’s just ridiculous.