The possibility of retrocausation has been considered to explain the occurrence of anomalous phenomena in which the ostensible effects are preceded by their causes. A scrutiny of both experimental methodology and the experimental data is called for. A review of experimental data reveals the existence of such effects to be a serious possibility. The experimental methodology entails some conceptual difficulties, these depending on the underlying assumptions about the effects. A major point is an ambiguity between anomalous acquisition of information and retrocausation in exerted influences.A unifying theory has been proposed, based upon the fundamental randomness of quantum mechanics. Quantum mechanical randomness may be regarded as a tenacious phenomenon, that apparently is only resolved by the human observer of the random variable in question. This has led to the “observational theory” of anomalous phenomena, which is based upon the assumption that the preference of a motivated observer is able to interact with the extant indefinite random variable that is being observed. This observational theory has led to a novel prediction, which has been corroborated in experiments. Moreover, different classes of anomalous phenomena can be explained by the same basic mechanism. This foregoes retroactive causation, but, instead, requires that macroscopic physical variables remain in a state of indefinite reality and thus remain influenceable by mental efforts until these are observed. More work is needed to discover the relevant psychological and neurophysiological variables involved in effective motivated observation. Besides these practicalities, the fundamentals still have some interesting loose ends.
The possibility of retrocausation has been considered to explain the occurrence of anomalous phenomena in which the ostensible effects are preceded by their causes. A scrutiny of both experimental methodology and the experimental data is called for. A review of experimental data reveals the existence of such effects to be a serious possibility. The experimental methodology entails some conceptual difficulties, these depending on the underlying assumptions about the effects. A major point is an ambiguity between anomalous acquisition of information and retrocausation in exerted influences.A unifying theory has been proposed, based upon the fundamental randomness of quantum mechanics. Quantum mechanical randomness may be regarded as a tenacious phenomenon, that apparently is only resolved by the human observer of the random variable in question. This has led to the “observational theory” of anomalous phenomena, which is based upon the assumption that the preference of a motivated observer is able to interact with the extant indefinite random variable that is being observed. This observational theory has led to a novel prediction, which has been corroborated in experiments. Moreover, different classes of anomalous phenomena can be explained by the same basic mechanism. This foregoes retroactive causation, but, instead, requires that macroscopic physical variables remain in a state of indefinite reality and thus remain influenceable by mental efforts until these are observed. More work is needed to discover the relevant psychological and neurophysiological variables involved in effective motivated observation. Besides these practicalities, the fundamentals still have some interesting loose ends.
The principle of cause and effect is deeply rooted in human experience, so much so that it is routinely and tacitly assumed throughout science, even by scientists working in areas where time symmetry is theoretically ingrained, as it is in both classical and quantum physics. Experiments are said to cause their results, not the other way around. In this informal paper, we argue that this assumption should be replaced with a more general notion of mutual influence — bi‐directional relations or constraints on joint values of two or more variables. From an analysis based on quantum entropy, it is proposed that quantum measurement is a unitary three‐interaction, with no collapse, no fundamental randomness, and no barrier to backward influence.Experimental results suggesting retrocausality are seen frequently in well‐controlled laboratory experiments in parapsychology and elsewhere, especially where a random element is included. Certain common characteristics of these experiments give the appearance of contradicting well‐established physical laws, thus providing an opportunity for deeper understanding and important clues that must be addressed by any explanatory theory. We discuss how retrocausal effects and other anomalous phenomena can be explained without major injury to existing physical theory. A modified quantum formalism can give new insights into the nature of quantum measurement, randomness, entanglement, causality, and time.
Abstract—The problem of devising a theory for paranormal phenomena (psi) may be separated into, first, the basic physical mechanism and second, the psychological aspects of how and when people are able to elicit psi. Observational theory addresses primarily the first aspect, the basic physical mechanism of psi. A problem is that the known types of physical interaction do not fit the existing data. The measurement problem in quantum mechanics can be used to hypothe-size an observer who adds information at the collapse of the wave function. For each random event one of the possible outcomes becomes realized as the event is being observed. The basic tenet of observational theory is: the statis-tics of single events become biased if the observer is motivated and prefers one of the possible outcomes over the other. Features of observational theory are: its predictive power, proven with re-gard to retroactive psychokinesis (PK); parsimony: the same mechanism ex-plains ESP as well as PK; fruitfulness, as there is a direct relationship with quantum mechanics; and openness to crucial experiments. The falsifiability criterion poses some problems: these are discussed in relation to Lakatos’ methodology of research programmes. Observational theory is a solution to the problem of the mediation of psi, thus providing a framework for the psychological problem of the manifesta-tion of psi. Henceforth, the observation of the outcome should be regarded as formal part of parapsychological experiments. There is reason for cautious, patient optimism about the acceptance of observational theory.
Since its inception, quantum mechanics has faced a series of “mysteries” that emerge from it if we consider this scientific theory from a realistic point of view. In the early development of the theory, scientists like Albert Einstein noticed the consequences of accepting a theory like this, which allow phenomena such as non-locality. This led a part of the scientific community to believe that quantum mechanics was an incomplete theory, since there should be variables that might explain those “disturbing” phenomena such as the correlation between entangled particles.Different interpretations of quantum mechanics have been proposed that have tried to reveal or explain the reality underlying its formalism. One of those interpretations is the “Transactional Interpretation” of quantum mechanics, advocated mainly by physicist John G. Cramer. According to this interpretation, quantum events are understood as causal interactions between delayed waves traveling forward in time and advanced waves traveling backward in time. This interpretation opens the door to accept a model of causation to the past or retrocausation.Authors like Phil Dowe or Huw Price have shown a favorable attitude toward the model of retrocausation because it seems to be capable of effectively solve some of the most disturbing features derived from quantum mechanics. Despite the intuitive cost is rather high, retrocausation is one of the possible interpretations for the results of the correlation between entangled particles to provide us with an explanatory framework with some interesting advantages.In this paper we explore such advantages, as the retrocausation gives us a generalizable explanatory model for all cases of this type and assumes processes and entities that are not only in the field of speculation but allow certain possibilities of testing. Also, we will rescue the importance of not-predictive explanatory models as has been the case in other fields of natural sciences, provided that those model do not be ad hoc due to restrictions that prevent its application to any case.
In recent years, operational approaches to quantum foundations have been developed as a means of understanding the core principles and distinctive features of quantum theory. Such approaches typically view physical processes as sequences of operations, with earlier operations serving as causes of later effects. However, a growing literature is emerging on the possibility of relaxing this assumption and allowing for quantum indefiniteness in the causal order. This development stems from a variety of motivations, both fundamental and applied, including exploring the role of causality in quantum theory, the interplay between quantum theory and general relativity, and higher-order quantum computing. A prominent offshoot of this development is the emergence of indefinite causal order as a feasible resource for quantum information processing. This review provides an overview of the current state of the art in the field, covering the methodology underlying indefinite quantum causality within the so-called "process matrix formalism", outlining key results and experimental implementations, and discussing recent advances.
This paper discusses experimental findings from the Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research project supporting the existence of retrocausal information flow. Possible alternative explanations to retrocausation are examined for each experiment. In each case it can be shown that retrocausal information flow is either a parsimonious explanation, or the only currently available explanation, for the observational data. Gedankenexperiments are then examined to demonstrate that regardless of observational effect size, empirical phenomena of the type seen in these experiments cannot produce time paradoxes.The theoretical discussion pursuant to the experimental data covers some of the basic problems in the physical representation of time. Human perception of time incorporates a dichotomy: the past is known but cannot be changed, the future is presumed to be indeterminate and hence controllable but unknowable in advance. Physical formalisms have difficulty in representing this dichotomy, arriving in the most extreme case at the completely deterministic Einsteinian block universe view of spacetime. Strict physical determinism, however, currently seems implausible due to apparently essential indeterminism at the quantum scale.Retrocausal phenomena attack the dichotomy on empirical rather than theoretical grounds, since if past events can be causally influenced by future events either the past is malleable or the future is knowable. This approach allows a resolution of the past/future dichotomy by additional approaches other than strict determinism: the past may be indeterminate, or both past and future can contain a mixture of deterministic and indeterminate events.
Cumulating evidence suggests that anomalous correlations occur between mental (conscious and non-conscious) states and apparently unrelated physical or mental phenomena at a distance in space and time. In spite of the fact that the evidence is very strong, these correlations are difficult to replicate. Several examples are given of ‘failures’ to empirically replicate1 original anomalies. It is speculated that this failure to replicate, rather than indicating that the original findings are due to statistical flukes or errors, suggests that when consciousness interacts with matter, an underlying reality arises. This reality is somewhere in between the purely objective shareable reality and the purely subjective reality of one’s individual consciousness. Efforts to ‘push’ anomalous phenomena observed in this intermediate reality into the objective one apparently destroy the phenomena. Possible explanations within a physical and within a system theoretical model are discussed. The physical model is based upon an analysis of the role of consciousness in the so-called ‘Measurement Problem’ in Quantum Physics. Based upon these discussions a new systematic experimental approach for the study of anomalous phenomena is suggested.