4 ms·
This would allow us to predict the future and potentially allow for time travel as well. Seems unlikely from the implications alone, but let's see what peer rev
by rf15 9y ago
This would allow us to predict the future and potentially allow for time travel as well. Seems unlikely from the implications alone, but let's see what peer review of the details will tell us.
- naasking 9y ago> This would allow us to predict the future and potentially allow for time travel as well. It doesn't actually, they discuss this in the article. The laws of thermodynamics impose an arrow of time via boundary conditions, and something similar would apply here.
- FeepingCreature 9y agoPurely as an amateur, it seems unelegant to have something that violates causality as a mechanism, but doesn't give you a way to violate cause and effect at a higher level. It's like the universe is conspiring to keep its awesome tricks from you.
- ajuc 9y agoSo, universe is like Haskel ;) Purely functional API, but under all of that there's still imperative machine code. Also, the conspiracy may be a good thing. If you have self-replicating and mutating code on your computer you should put some sandbox around it, or it might evolve to buy more RAM on ebay. Or, more realistically - will crash the system.
- naasking 9y ago> It's like the universe is conspiring to keep its awesome tricks from you. Well that's just inevitable. You're never going to see a naked singularity, for instance.
- rf15 9y agoTrue. I also like the implication that we have another proof against T-symmetry.
- roywiggins 9y agoEntanglement would too, if it allowed superluminal communication in the classical sense. But, it doesn't- you can't use entanglement to send information, even if there is a spooky interaction at a distance. Retrocausality would probably work in the same way.
- rf15 9y agogood comparison, sure sounds like entanglement in parts
- roywiggins 9y agoI think the idea is to use retrocausality to replace entanglement. No spooky action at a distance- it's just that when you observe one of the pair, it retroactively "picks" the state it always was, which retroactively sets the state of its partner back when they were first entangled.
- obastani 9y agoUnless I am missing standing, the goal is only to produce a new interpretation of quantum mechanics. That is, the predicted physics do not change, only the formulation of the theory. Therefore, anything possible under this formulation is also possible under more traditional formulation of quantum mechanics (e.g., the many world's interpretation).