Do we need entanglement to explain the Arrow of Time? Even though in classical mechanics, the past and the future are both equally observable, we remember the p

Do we need entanglement to explain the Arrow of Time? Even though in classical mechanics, the past and the future are both equally observable, we remember the past and not the future because the future does not contain certain information yet -- the information to be introduced into the universe in the form of quantum fluctuations. One could even argue that all information in the universe was created at some point in time due to one quantum event or other. I may have misunderstood though (I'm not a physicist). Entanglement does however, explain why systems tend to equilibrium rather than any other type of state as it evolves forward in time. On a related note, I found this quote interesting. It reminds me of how HN comments about quantum information theory has a tendency to get downvoted: > The idea, presented in his 1988 doctoral thesis, fell on deaf ears. When he submitted it to a journal, he was told that there was “no physics in this paper.” Quantum information theory “was profoundly unpopular” at the time, Lloyd said, and questions about time’s arrow “were for crackpots and Nobel laureates who have gone soft in the head.” he remembers one physicist telling him.