Time Warp: Delayed-choice quantum erasure

Sure sure, you can ignore that wording. The point is that the first measurement determines the state of the particle undergoing the second measurement.

Not sure how we could ever prove something like that but it's certainly an amusing and symmetrical view of the universe: big bangs create two universes, moving in opposite time directions from each other. Each seeing the other's particles as anti-particles.

Thinking about it though: photos are their own antiparticle. So I'd expect to see a lot more cosmic microwave background than we should because at least in the early days the antimatter universe would have been visible to us?

Side note: how can photos be their own antiparticle? Same reason they move at the speed of causality. They have no mass thus do not experience the flow of time themselves. So they do not annihilate with themselves. From a photon's POV a trip across the universe is instant.

Photons are their own anti-particle, so the distinction isn't particularly useful, but the representation is equally valid.

No it isn't. Please stop.

You don't even need a wormhole. Light can "reflect" (ok more like slingshot) around a blackhole 25 million light years away, giving us a direct visual path to our own planet 50 millions years ago.

Of course our telescopes don't have anywhere near the resolution for this right now.

There is this sci-fi book about this, but I forgot name/author. In the book a wormhole end can be positioned anywhere in space and time history. The tech starts as an ITER-like project and then becomes available in mainstream products, and all the dirty secrets of mankind come to light.

The photons would be so spread out that you'd need a telescope with a primary optic bigger than anything else in the universe. And even then, you'd struggle to capture enough to have any meaningful information.

50 million light years would not get you light from 65+ million years ago.

If you can't get photons from the future, just get a hold of some thiotimoline, a compound invented by SF master Isaac Asimov that dissolves slightly before it is added to water. After first describing it in a spoof chemistry paper, he returned to it several times, exploring its different applications and the new scientific field it created, "chronochemistry".

The best IMHO is "Thiotimoline and the Space Age" from 1960. You can read it on archive.org: https://archive.org/details/MerrilEdTheYearsBestSF05/Merril_...

You're totally right that I am not a scientific expert on this by any means. But often, breakthroughs in science come not from orthodoxy or experts, but exactly the people who don't believe in the orthodoxy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck%27s_principle

Examples include:

Einstein's theory of relativity vs luminferous ether orthodoxy

Rutherford's discovery of radioactivity vs the 100 million age of the earth orthodoxy following Lord Kelvin, Feynman noted how scientists kept staying within a certain range until the next generation suddenly felt bold enough to go further https://www.americanscientist.org/article/kelvin-perry-and-t...

Pasteur's discovery of microbes against the orthodoxy that continually ridiculed people like Ignaz Semmelweiss even decades later https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignaz_Semmelweis ... people still believed in spontaneous generation of living matter

Galileo's insistence on the heliocentric model, etc. https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/galileo-is-accus...

Ancient greek ideas of phlogiston, the four humours, etc. or the idea that the heart rather than the brain is where thoughts originate, were in place for millennia

So, engage me on the substance. Discuss the actual substance of what I said. I am saying that PWT explains what we observe in quantum mechanics, and preserves realism at the expense of locality. And that FTL communication is not just possible but a lot less weird than Everett's MWI. I am saying that even if we can escape the light cone that doesn't mean necessarily that we can send information back in time (the ways postulated involve a lot of assumptions) and even if we did, it wouldn't violate any major principles.

I'm saying that we have to use classical mechanics to move the entangled parties apart. So we can't escape our existing light cone, or send messages to the past. But going forward, once we do set it up, we can build e.g. security systems that can't be stopped because they "teleport" some information to another location, even if wires are cut and electrical signals are blocked. I'm saying you don't need to classically move things in order to teleport information.

Einstein's objections that you can send information back in time involve exotic constructs and massive assumptions. And even if they were true, this wouldn't cause any paradoxes. Because the effect is tiny, and the probability of it being amplified is tiny, same as the probability of you passing through a wall due to quantum fluctuations.

But, the way it would manifest is that measurements would be probabilistically biased one way or the other. If there is an intelligence on the other side, it can actually act on this information. This FTL doesn't mean sending info back in time. But even if we were able to, then eventually with enough bandwidth we could communicate with the past, through this thing. It would be like a magic 8-ball that tells you some things. With enough bandwidth you might be able to bootstrap a stronger solution, ending up with a Closed Timelike Curve. I'm saying that there are still no paradoxes at that point because if you can believe Everett's MWI of worlds forking all the time everywhere, then you can certainly believe that worlds fork in these extremely rare scenarios of a closed timelike curve. So you have a sort of corkscrew where in some worlds you bootstrapped the thing, and in other world a lot of information is arriving from the future. But all that is very theoretical and not required just for FTL communication.

The way we achieve FTL communication is to improve quantum error-correction, as Microsoft has done. Once we have enough qubits, it may turn out that the randomness was because we are just "were not able to throw the dice in a controlled enough manner". That's what the DeBroglie-Bohm's Pilot Wave Theory says. It postulates local realism (attributing the randomness to our limitations), and accepts FTL information transmission via pilot waves. And by the way the other, wackier, theories don't rule out FTL communication either.

So we will soon enter an era where we can test this. When we overcome the quantum error rates and prevent decoherence, we'll be able to actually INFLUENCE remote measurements at FTL speeds. Not perfectly, but enough that we can send information. That's my prediction. Then we'll know if PWT is actually true.

This idea that all interpretations of quantum theory are exactly the same, in that they produce exactly the same predictions, is only true while the randomness and error rate is high. Once we learn to cancel out the errors, suddenly we'll get a "clearer picture" and be able to throw the dice more accurately.