Thursday, July 27, 2023

Arguing for Retrocausality

Aeon essay:
Almost a century ago, physics produced a problem child, astonishingly successful yet profoundly puzzling. Now, just in time for its 100th birthday, we think we’ve found a simple diagnosis of its central eccentricity. ...

The strangeness has a name – it’s called entanglement – but it is still poorly understood. Why does the quantum world behave this strange way? We think we’ve solved a central piece of this puzzle. ...

More recently, we ourselves have written about the advantages of retrocausal approaches to QM, both in avoiding action at a distance, and in respecting ‘time-symmetry’, the principle that the microworld doesn’t care about the distinction between past and future. But an additional striking advantage of retrocausality seems to have been missed. It suggests a simple mechanism for ‘the characteristic trait of quantum mechanics’ (Schrödinger), ‘its weirdest feature’ (Weinberg) – in other words, for the strange connections between separated systems called quantum entanglement.

It is amazing what mental gymnastics people will do to avoid accepting the quantum mechanics of 1927.

The Heisenberg Uncertainty principle is a little strange, but these guys somehow think that it is better to assume that the future determines the past?

Others prefer many-worlds, spooky action at a distance, or superdeterminism. They are all crazy.

Finally, a note for readers who are worried that the cure is worse than the disease – that retrocausality opens the door to a menagerie of paradoxes and problems. Well spotted!

1 comment:

  1. Watches and measuring instruments do not affect time in any way whatsoever other than to mark its passing.

    ALL time measurements are based on some kind of a movement over another kind of movement in a ratio, so you have a calculated measured process and observation thereof required for it to be even considered as time. It is time that affects the processes that watches and measuring instruments rely on, not the other way around. Just think about it.

    All math without exception is a process that must follow logical rules of operation (order dependent) to even be considered math at all. There can be no retrocausality because that would require the logical operations the math is utterly dependent upon to function independently outside of time, in a meta time where the retrocausality could be considered 'retro' in relation to the 'normal time'. This is basically just a cheap dime a dozen omniscient vantage paradox stuffed inside a pointless infinite regression.

    The Mathematican (or observer) never has been and never will be observing anything outside of or independent of time except in their own fantasy, this also applies to any instrumentation or computational device we can possibly know about or build. Imagination is wonderful stuff when used intelligently, but it is not logical or remotely scientific, and it does not violate any laws of causality even if the deluded children pretending to be scientists like to say so.

    It's about time that supposedly learned folk with overpriced framed sheep skins acknowledge this and leave the cheap time paradox drivel to the screenwriters of star trek and doctor who.