Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

Traveling to the past is possible! - A Model of Quantum-Temporal Coupling Through Entanglement and Thermal Inertia of Matter

Gorobets, Maksym

Published Nov 4, 2025• 0 citations
Publisher

Abstract

Traveling to the past is possible! “A Model of Quantum-Temporal Coupling Through Entanglement and Thermal Inertia of Matter” Author: Maksym Gorobets, Ukraine 1. Main Hypothesis If travel into the future is possible by accelerating motion to the speed of light (according to the theory of relativity), then travel into the past can be realized by extremely slowing down the motion of matter, up to the limit when atoms actually stop thermal dynamics — that is, to absolute zero (−273.15°C). ⸻ 2. Key Physical Idea When reaching a temperature close to 0 K, particles form a Bose–Einstein Condensate (BEC) — a quantum state where many particles behave as one single quantum object. In such a state, the usual concept of space and time may lose its meaning, since the entire system becomes a single wave and a synchronized quantum state. ⸻ 3. Relationship with quantum entanglement If we create a pair of entangled quanta (A and B), and then: • immerse quantum A in a medium cooled to 0 K, • leave quantum B in ordinary space, then the information interaction between them can occur instantly (beyond the speed of light), since quantum A is in a state where space and time have no local limitations. ⸻ 4. Informational aspect If information is written into the “frozen” quantum (A), it can be received by the quantum twin (B) earlier than the moment of recording in our timeline. That is, the transfer of information into the past can be realized through the information channel of quantum entanglement, stabilized by absolute zero. ⸻ 5. Practical model (simplified) - We create two entangled photons or atoms. - We cool one to a temperature → −273.15°C. - In this state, we write minimal information (for example, spin or phase) into the quantum. - We check whether this information appears in the second quantum (B) earlier in time than the entry in (A) was made. ⸻ 6. Possible consequences • Confirmation of such interaction would mean that information can move not only “outside space”, but also out of time. • This creates the basis for a new type of communication — quantum retrograde communication, or “temporal teleportation”. ⸻ 7. Philosophical conclusion The human brain is not able to invent something that is fundamentally impossible in the Universe — it only “connects” to potential physical structures that may exist. Therefore, the very emergence of the idea of time travel is not a fantasy, but an echo of an unrealized, but possible physical reality. ⸻ 04.11.2025 Maxim GOROBETS, Ukraine gorob123456@gmail.com https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17526667

DOI
10.5281/zenodo.17526521

Related papers

On the Quantum Entanglement Reinterpretation Using the Time as Real Instantaneous Signal Field

Elsadig Naseraddeen Ahmed Mohamed

In relativistic mechanics the time-like vector characterize the motion in spacetime with speed faster than the speed of light in vacuum c in which the line element ds2=c2dt2-dx2-dx2-dz2 is less than zero (where is infinitesimal change in time, and are infinitesimal change in space), thus the time in relativistic mechanics can instantaneously flow [1], however in quantum mechanics although the time is treated as unobservable parameter (without any Hermitian observable operator have engine-value equivalent to time) any two physical quantity described by two non-commuting observable operatorsand fulfill , the knowledge of one immediately produce the knowledge of the other [2], thus in quantum mechanics if two particles interacted in finite temporal epoch and then separated in space the gaining of knowledge by the local measurement of physical quantity runs on one them (for example the measurement of spin direction of one particle using Stern-Gerlach experiment) immediately produce the knowledge of the complementary physical quantity of the other particle (for example the opposite spin direction of the other particle), this simply called quantum entanglement the concept that so much advanced after publication of the Jon Bell’s 1964 celebrated paper [3] in which he illustrated that we can add parameters to quantum mechanics to determine the results of individual measurements, without changing the statistical predictions, and then he conclude “there must be a mechanism whereby the setting of one measuring device can influence the reading of another instrument, however remote. Moreover, the signal involved must propagate instantaneously so that such a theory could not be Lorentz invariant”. The question now what these signals that can propagate instantaneously? The answer in this paper will be the time signals field which is defined for each constituent matter particle M and at each space point P as the measure of the total length of all occupation and leaving epochs of P by M which is representing a sequence function compactly supported only at the space point occupied by it and indexed by the number of occupation epochs of P by M, thus the flow of this time signal field from the far future to near future through the present to the near past to the far past inferable by the flow of matter particles constituting the system(such as sun, moon earth and clocks hands). Thus the present will represent in this paper a local absolute feature of time signals field defined at each space point as the set of all occupation epochs of it by matter particle, however the past and future will represent relativistic non-local features of the time signal field defined at each space point as a set of all leaving epochs between each two sequential occupation epochs, so the future after one occupation epoch is representing a past of the next one. Thus according to current representation of time, the two Mc-Taggard’s A and B series of time [4] will exist together as temporal set and then the time is real, the A-series in current theory is a set of all occupation and leaving epochs of space point by the matter particle that is consisting of the present, past and future epochs, and the B-series is the set of all leaving epochs of space points between each two sequential occupation epochs which are taking position before or after the discrete occupation epochs between them and then before or after each other.

Journal of Modern Physics•Jan 1, 2017•0 citations

Practical Time Travel - Entangling the Near Future with the Recent Past

Allan Goff

This paper surveys a research effort to explore the potential for quantum nonlocality to support superluminal signaling. The emphasis is on the issue of temporal paradox. Through the metaphor of Quantum Tic-Tac-Toe, it is shown how superposition leads to a Many Worlds variant called the Classical Ensemble. As a quantum system evolves, superposition branches off new classical realities, but contradictory ones are pruned from the ensemble. The pruning results in nonseparable states and thus to entangling of the quantum system. When these entanglements become cyclic, they introduce nonlinearities into the quantum system that result in self-collapse. Since cyclic entanglements are in general self-referential in only one basis, collapse occurs only in the self-referential basis. Cyclic entanglements are thus a viable candidate as the measurement mechanism. Collapse is made consistent with relativity by introducing the symmetric spacetime interval. The resulting closed loops in spacetime entangle the near future with the recent past so collapse of quantum systems offers a potential means for achieving superluminal signaling (FTL) and something very like time travel. The pruning in the classical ensemble acts as the censor mechanism that prevents temporal paradox while allowing backwards-in-time causality. This removes the logical objections to FTL and time travel.

AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference & Exhibit (JPC)•Jul 10, 2005•1 citation

The Temporal Causality Barrier

Uday Patil

This paper presents a conceptual and analytical investigation into the limits of temporal access through the combined perspectives of causality, relativity, quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and information theory. The work introduces the concept of the “Temporal Causality Barrier,” a selective and logically grounded framework that distinguishes between passive temporal observation and active temporal intervention. The paper argues that passive observation of the past is both physically permissible and continuously occurring through ordinary causal processes such as light propagation, memory, historical records, and astronomical observation. In contrast, active intervention into the past including backward information transfer, causal alteration of previous events, and closed causal loops is shown to generate logical contradictions and violations of causal consistency. The analysis critically examines major theoretical approaches related to time travel and retrocausality, including closed timelike curves, Novikov’s self-consistency principle, Deutsch’s quantum closed timelike curve model, and the two-state vector formalism in quantum mechanics. The paper argues that while some interpretations may mathematically describe retrocausal correlations, none currently provide an operational mechanism for backward information transmission without encountering paradoxes or information-theoretic inconsistencies. The framework further connects the causal structure of spacetime with the thermodynamic arrow of time, emphasizing the role of entropy, light cone geometry, and information propagation in preserving temporal coherence. The work also explores broader philosophical implications concerning the nature of time, consciousness, causality, and agency within a causally structured universe. Rather than proposing a new physical force or replacing existing theories, this paper provides a logically structured analysis of why temporal observation is compatible with known physics while active temporal intervention remains fundamentally constrained by both physical law and logical consistency.

•May 30, 2026•0 citations

The number 1 in front of the mirror: Mathematical Materiality from the nexus to the cosmos

Ugo Lanciano

Common introduction to all the records of this series. The content of this record follows below. Mathematical Materiality (MM) in brief. Why are the laws of physics the same everywhere and at every instant, even though nothing forces matter to obey them? MM proposes an answer: the laws are not rules imposed on matter from the outside; rather, matter itself is made of mathematical relations. And mathematics cannot change: a relation binds two distinct terms everywhere and always. In logic, nothing exists on its own: to exist means to be in relation to another logical entity, and outside this web of relations nothing can exist, not even other universes. This reading already meets experimental measurements at two points. First, the ratio of dark to ordinary matter is read as 3√3 = 5.196; when left free in the fits, Planck and DESI DR2 data give 5.21–5.22 (as registered in record 2.44, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23329080). Second, the acceleration scale of galaxies is read as a₀ = cH₀/6, the same scale that appears in Verlinde's emergent gravity: the computed value is 1.09–1.18 × 10⁻¹⁰ m/s² against the measured value of 1.20 (record 2.46.1, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23506655). Both readings were formulated with the measurements already known; the tests to check them against future data are registered in the same records. In the first logical nexus between space and time — which became homogeneous with Einstein — there is a non-local phase, made only of a pure logical distinction: space is not time. Between the two there is no relation of quantitative calculation, only the logical entity they have in common, which is needed to make them exist with respect to each other. This level is not distant: it is present in every phase of reality, in every place and at every instant. It shows in entanglement, where two distant systems remain correlated more strongly than any explanation based on separate properties and free of faster-than-light influences allows, without anything physically travelling between them. In this non-local phase the two distinct terms, space and time, share only one logical element, which we shall call their greatest common divisor (GCD), just as the numbers 3 and 5 have only 1 in common. The local world arises when a relation is counted through this GCD: its multiples and its fractions form a matrix. Seen by an observer inside the system like us, the multiples appear as time and the fractions as space. When that same multiple is directly contained in the matrix of the point of observation, it turns into mass — that is, into concrete matter as we usually understand it. There is therefore a close link between time and mass, in full agreement with Einstein's relativity, which ties mass to spacetime. The observed objects, while being logically autonomous entities in their local relations, enter into relation with the observer through a logical diffraction — that is, a decomposition into fractions — of the observer's matrix. This reading also gives a reason for the limit of the speed of light, which in Einstein's relativity is instead taken as a starting principle. The speed of light is the fixed exchange rate between the multiples and the fractions of the same GCD, meaning how much space a single step of time is worth: exceeding it would mean, for some observer, covering space without counting time, and thus leaving the local world. Logic always starts from a logical relative, and this exchange rate has nothing absolute in itself either: it is a necessary relative which, inside the system, becomes an absolute hypothesis, the same for everyone and impossible to exceed. Outside the system, by contrast, it has no justification at all, because outside there is only non-existence: justifying something requires another term to relate it to, and out there there is none. Asking for a reason from outside is like asking what lies north of the North Pole. The same theoretical framework that reads space, time, mass and the observed objects also admits quantum mechanics. The non-local phase and the mirror-like logical reciprocity between the two ends of the nexus give a reason for the probabilistic behaviour of matter. When the observed object is large enough, its mass fixes it in the matrix of the point of observation: for this reason we see it in one precise place and at one precise instant. When instead the object falls below a certain mass threshold, the principal GCD (that of the point of observation) and the GCD of the diffraction that generates the object are forced to become equal, reflecting each other as in a mirror. At that point the object no longer occupies a single point of the spacetime generated by the observer, but spreads over several possible positions, and we observe it as probability. It is like having to describe the number 10 using only the number 1: the only way is to distribute the 1 over ten positions, one for each unit of the 10. Today we know that even objects made of thousands of atoms behave in this way, and no experiment has yet found the boundary. The idea that the passage from quantum to classical behaviour depends on mass is close to that of Penrose and Diósi; in MM the threshold is the point where the two GCDs, the principal one and that of the local diffraction, become equal. For all these reasons the universe behaves like a simulation without really being one. It follows exact rules, made of counts, everywhere and at every instant, but no machine runs them and no programmer wrote them: a structure of mathematical relations does not need to be computed in order to exist. Tegmark (2008) had already noted that such a simulation need not be run, while Vazza (2025) estimated that running it physically on a machine would require resources that the very laws of the universe do not allow. The work is shared openly so that it can be judged by as many readers as possible: anyone who knows someone interested can pass on this single link, valid for the whole framework (with an overview in English and Italian): https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23535916. The entry page, with the complete list of all records, is https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22667516. To cite the framework: Lanciano, U. (2026). The number 1 in front of the mirror: Mathematical Materiality from the nexus to the cosmos. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23535916. The records have been deposited since 5 August 2026, each with its own date, and are released under CC BY 4.0: anyone may use them by citing the source. Objections and errors found are welcome at riverantares@gmail.com, since Zenodo has no space for comments. This record contains the four-page summary of the framework, in English and in Italian: the question of why physical laws hold everywhere with nothing to enforce them; the Great Reversal; the non-local phase and its empirical trace in Bell-type experiments; the five postulates with the example of 3 and 5; the matrix; the equals sign as a mirror; a clock made of 3 and 5, whose two means give Einstein's slowing of moving clocks (a known identity: Bondi 1964; Knuth and Bahreyni 2014); and the comparison with two measured numbers. The full overview, with the list of all records, is at DOI 10.5281/zenodo.22667516. The author is not a professional physicist; the framework and its premises are the author's own. The texts were written with the help of AI assistants. There has been no review by human referees.

•Oct 21, 2026•4 citations

Quantum Entanglement Time Expansion

Jincheng Zhang

Quantum entanglement, a phenomenon where two or more particles become linked and share the same fate regardless of the distance separating them, has long captivated the imaginations of physicists and science fiction enthusiasts alike. This paper explores the potential of utilizing quantum entanglement to investigate the theoretical possibility of time travel, presenting a novel theoretical framework centered around the concept of time dilation induced by entanglement. We argue that by meticulously simulating time dilation effects within entangled systems, we can potentially unlock insights into the fundamental nature of spacetime and, consequently, the feasibility of manipulating time itself. While this research remains highly speculative, it serves as a foundation for exploring a fundamentally new approach to temporal mechanics, moving beyond the limitations of traditional models.

•Sep 4, 2026•0 citations

Not at a distance, but nowhere: non-locality beyond entanglement, in twelve phenomena

Ugo Lanciano

This record. Twelve phenomena, entanglement among them, read through the same non-local phase: «non-local» as not located in space and time, not as action at a distance. Reading path: Foundations: why the laws hold, 5 of 5 · before: Is mass a contained rhythm? · all themes. Common introduction to all the records of this series. The content of this record follows below. Mathematical Materiality (MM) in brief. Why are the laws of physics the same everywhere and at every instant, even though nothing forces matter to obey them? MM proposes an answer: the laws are not rules imposed on matter from the outside; rather, matter itself is made of mathematical relations. And mathematics cannot change: a relation binds two distinct terms everywhere and always. In logic, nothing exists on its own: to exist means to be in relation to another logical entity, and outside this web of relations nothing can exist, not even other universes. This reading already meets experimental measurements at two points. First, the ratio of dark to ordinary matter is read as 3√3 = 5.196; when left free in the fits, Planck and DESI DR2 data give 5.21–5.22 (as registered in record 2.44, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23329080). Second, the acceleration scale of galaxies is read as a₀ = cH₀/6, the same scale that appears in Verlinde's emergent gravity: the computed value is 1.09–1.18 × 10⁻¹⁰ m/s² against the measured value of 1.20 (record 2.46.1, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23506655). Both readings were formulated with the measurements already known; the tests to check them against future data are registered in the same records. In the first logical nexus between space and time — which became homogeneous with Einstein — there is a non-local phase, made only of a pure logical distinction: space is not time. Between the two there is no relation of quantitative calculation, only the logical entity they have in common, which is needed to make them exist with respect to each other. This level is not distant: it is present in every phase of reality, in every place and at every instant. It shows in entanglement, where two distant systems remain correlated more strongly than any explanation based on separate properties and free of faster-than-light influences allows, without anything physically travelling between them. In this non-local phase the two distinct terms, space and time, share only one logical element, which we shall call their greatest common divisor (GCD), just as the numbers 3 and 5 have only 1 in common. The local world arises when a relation is counted through this GCD: its multiples and its fractions form a matrix. Seen by an observer inside the system like us, the multiples appear as time and the fractions as space. When that same multiple is directly contained in the matrix of the point of observation, it turns into mass — that is, into concrete matter as we usually understand it. There is therefore a close link between time and mass, in full agreement with Einstein's relativity, which ties mass to spacetime. The observed objects, while being logically autonomous entities in their local relations, enter into relation with the observer through a logical diffraction — that is, a decomposition into fractions — of the observer's matrix. This reading also gives a reason for the limit of the speed of light, which in Einstein's relativity is instead taken as a starting principle. The speed of light is the fixed exchange rate between the multiples and the fractions of the same GCD, meaning how much space a single step of time is worth: exceeding it would mean, for some observer, covering space without counting time, and thus leaving the local world. Logic always starts from a logical relative, and this exchange rate has nothing absolute in itself either: it is a necessary relative which, inside the system, becomes an absolute hypothesis, the same for everyone and impossible to exceed. Outside the system, by contrast, it has no justification at all, because outside there is only non-existence: justifying something requires another term to relate it to, and out there there is none. Asking for a reason from outside is like asking what lies north of the North Pole. The same theoretical framework that reads space, time, mass and the observed objects also admits quantum mechanics. The non-local phase and the mirror-like logical reciprocity between the two ends of the nexus give a reason for the probabilistic behaviour of matter. When the observed object is large enough, its mass fixes it in the matrix of the point of observation: for this reason we see it in one precise place and at one precise instant. When instead the object falls below a certain mass threshold, the principal GCD (that of the point of observation) and the GCD of the diffraction that generates the object are forced to become equal, reflecting each other as in a mirror. At that point the object no longer occupies a single point of the spacetime generated by the observer, but spreads over several possible positions, and we observe it as probability. It is like having to describe the number 10 using only the number 1: the only way is to distribute the 1 over ten positions, one for each unit of the 10. Today we know that even objects made of thousands of atoms behave in this way, and no experiment has yet found the boundary. The idea that the passage from quantum to classical behaviour depends on mass is close to that of Penrose and Diósi; in MM the threshold is the point where the two GCDs, the principal one and that of the local diffraction, become equal. For all these reasons the universe behaves like a simulation without really being one. It follows exact rules, made of counts, everywhere and at every instant, but no machine runs them and no programmer wrote them: a structure of mathematical relations does not need to be computed in order to exist. Tegmark (2008) had already noted that such a simulation need not be run, while Vazza (2025) estimated that running it physically on a machine would require resources that the very laws of the universe do not allow. This record develops one aspect of the theoretical framework. The work is shared openly so that it can be judged by as many readers as possible: anyone who knows someone interested can pass on this single link, valid for the whole framework (with an overview in English and Italian): https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23535916. The entry page, with the complete list of all records, is https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22667516. To cite the framework: Lanciano, U. (2026). The number 1 in front of the mirror: Mathematical Materiality from the nexus to the cosmos. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23535916. The records have been deposited since 5 August 2026, each with its own date, and are released under CC BY 4.0: anyone may use them by citing the source. Objections and errors found are welcome at riverantares@gmail.com, since Zenodo has no space for comments. This record. In physics «non-locality» mostly names one fact: the correlations of entanglement. In Mathematical Materiality (MM) it is the foundation: a non-local phase, not located in space and time and present everywhere, of which the local world is the count made from a point. Here «non-local» means not located in space and time; it does not mean action at a distance. This record collects, from MM's published records and the author's premises, twelve phenomena in which MM's reading uses the same non-local phase as the reason, and shows that entanglement is the case in which it rests most directly on a measured datum, not the only one. There are no new calculations: the result is the unity of the reading. The twelve phenomena: the correlations of entanglement beyond Bell's limit, and their Tsirelson ceiling, set by the local reading (MM 2.48, 2.48.1); the same laws everywhere and always, as copies of the same nexus (MM 2.68); identical particles, as the same unit counted twice (a proposal of the AI); the objects two observers see alike, as two counts of one non-local relation (MM 2.62.1); the boundary of the local as a number of copies, not a distance (August status report, reread); probability and the Born rule (MM 2.48.1); the mass below which an object stops being at one point (MM 2.66); the present, and the loop in which the future chooses what is written (MM 2.48, 2.68.1); space and time themselves: a clock counting events without pre-assigned places runs at Einstein's proper time (MM 2.40.2); the limit of light, the same for everyone; dark matter as the ordinary matter of a second mirror, with no reciprocal non-local link to us (MM 2.44); the boundary within which a gravitating system reads only its own field, set by the Galaxy (MM 2.70). How each is set out. For every phenomenon: what is observed, with sources; how known physics reads it; what the non-local phase does; where the link comes from (already written in a deposit, a premise of the author, or a proposal of the AI); what rests on calculations already deposited; what remains open. In ten phenomena the link is already in the deposits or in the author's premises; in one it comes partly from the AI, and in one from the AI alone. Three ways organise them: copies without distance, existence through a link, and a reading that is always local and partial. What is not claimed. The non-local phase transmits no signals and no influences outside light cones. Today it has no distinct experimental signature: where MM gives numbers, they coincide with known physics (the Tsirelson bound, decoherence, wave optics) or come from readings with declared choices. The record also lists the other senses in which «non-local» appears in MM's records, so that they are not confused with this one. Where the reading is tested. Gaia DR4 in December 2026 (rules registered in MM 2.70) and the mass threshold, with a prediction dated 31 December 2035 (MM 2.66); five open questions from MM 2.68. Contents: REA

•Oct 28, 2026•0 citations
Traveling to the past is possible! “A Model of Quantum-Temporal Coupling Through Entanglement and Thermal Inertia of Matter” Author: Maksym Gorobets, Ukraine 1. Main Hypothesis If travel into the future is possible by accelerating motion to the speed of light (according to the theory of relativity), then travel into the past can be realized by extremely slowing down the motion of matter, up to the limit when atoms actually stop thermal dynamics — that is, to absolute zero (−273.15°C). ⸻ 2. Key Physical Idea When reaching a temperature close to 0 K, particles form a Bose–Einstein Condensate (BEC) — a quantum state where many particles behave as one single quantum object. In such a state, the usual concept of space and time may lose its meaning, since the entire system becomes a single wave and a synchronized quantum state. ⸻ 3. Relationship with quantum entanglement If we create a pair of entangled quanta (A and B), and then: • immerse quantum A in a medium cooled to 0 K, • leave quantum B in ordinary space, then the information interaction between them can occur instantly (beyond the speed of light), since quantum A is in a state where space and time have no local limitations. ⸻ 4. Informational aspect If information is written into the “frozen” quantum (A), it can be received by the quantum twin (B) earlier than the moment of recording in our timeline. That is, the transfer of information into the past can be realized through the information channel of quantum entanglement, stabilized by absolute zero. ⸻ 5. Practical model (simplified) - We create two entangled photons or atoms. - We cool one to a temperature → −273.15°C. - In this state, we write minimal information (for example, spin or phase) into the quantum. - We check whether this information appears in the second quantum (B) earlier in time than the entry in (A) was made. ⸻ 6. Possible consequences • Confirmation of such interaction would mean that information can move not only “outside space”, but also out of time. • This creates the basis for a new type of communication — quantum retrograde communication, or “temporal teleportation”. ⸻ 7. Philosophical conclusion The human brain is not able to invent something that is fundamentally impossible in the Universe — it only “connects” to potential physical structures that may exist. Therefore, the very emergence of the idea of time travel is not a fantasy, but an echo of an unrealized, but possible physical reality. ⸻ 04.11.2025 Maxim GOROBETS, Ukraine gorob123456@gmail.com https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17526667
In relativistic mechanics the time-like vector characterize the motion in spacetime with speed faster than the speed of light in vacuum c in which the line element ds2=c2dt2-dx2-dx2-dz2 is less than zero (where is infinitesimal change in time, and are infinitesimal change in space), thus the time in relativistic mechanics can instantaneously flow [1], however in quantum mechanics although the time is treated as unobservable parameter (without any Hermitian observable operator have engine-value equivalent to time) any two physical quantity described by two non-commuting observable operatorsand fulfill , the knowledge of one immediately produce the knowledge of the other [2], thus in quantum mechanics if two particles interacted in finite temporal epoch and then separated in space the gaining of knowledge by the local measurement of physical quantity runs on one them (for example the measurement of spin direction of one particle using Stern-Gerlach experiment) immediately produce the knowledge of the complementary physical quantity of the other particle (for example the opposite spin direction of the other particle), this simply called quantum entanglement the concept that so much advanced after publication of the Jon Bell’s 1964 celebrated paper [3] in which he illustrated that we can add parameters to quantum mechanics to determine the results of individual measurements, without changing the statistical predictions, and then he conclude “there must be a mechanism whereby the setting of one measuring device can influence the reading of another instrument, however remote. Moreover, the signal involved must propagate instantaneously so that such a theory could not be Lorentz invariant”. The question now what these signals that can propagate instantaneously? The answer in this paper will be the time signals field which is defined for each constituent matter particle M and at each space point P as the measure of the total length of all occupation and leaving epochs of P by M which is representing a sequence function compactly supported only at the space point occupied by it and indexed by the number of occupation epochs of P by M, thus the flow of this time signal field from the far future to near future through the present to the near past to the far past inferable by the flow of matter particles constituting the system(such as sun, moon earth and clocks hands). Thus the present will represent in this paper a local absolute feature of time signals field defined at each space point as the set of all occupation epochs of it by matter particle, however the past and future will represent relativistic non-local features of the time signal field defined at each space point as a set of all leaving epochs between each two sequential occupation epochs, so the future after one occupation epoch is representing a past of the next one. Thus according to current representation of time, the two Mc-Taggard’s A and B series of time [4] will exist together as temporal set and then the time is real, the A-series in current theory is a set of all occupation and leaving epochs of space point by the matter particle that is consisting of the present, past and future epochs, and the B-series is the set of all leaving epochs of space points between each two sequential occupation epochs which are taking position before or after the discrete occupation epochs between them and then before or after each other.
This paper surveys a research effort to explore the potential for quantum nonlocality to support superluminal signaling. The emphasis is on the issue of temporal paradox. Through the metaphor of Quantum Tic-Tac-Toe, it is shown how superposition leads to a Many Worlds variant called the Classical Ensemble. As a quantum system evolves, superposition branches off new classical realities, but contradictory ones are pruned from the ensemble. The pruning results in nonseparable states and thus to entangling of the quantum system. When these entanglements become cyclic, they introduce nonlinearities into the quantum system that result in self-collapse. Since cyclic entanglements are in general self-referential in only one basis, collapse occurs only in the self-referential basis. Cyclic entanglements are thus a viable candidate as the measurement mechanism. Collapse is made consistent with relativity by introducing the symmetric spacetime interval. The resulting closed loops in spacetime entangle the near future with the recent past so collapse of quantum systems offers a potential means for achieving superluminal signaling (FTL) and something very like time travel. The pruning in the classical ensemble acts as the censor mechanism that prevents temporal paradox while allowing backwards-in-time causality. This removes the logical objections to FTL and time travel.
This paper presents a conceptual and analytical investigation into the limits of temporal access through the combined perspectives of causality, relativity, quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and information theory. The work introduces the concept of the “Temporal Causality Barrier,” a selective and logically grounded framework that distinguishes between passive temporal observation and active temporal intervention. The paper argues that passive observation of the past is both physically permissible and continuously occurring through ordinary causal processes such as light propagation, memory, historical records, and astronomical observation. In contrast, active intervention into the past including backward information transfer, causal alteration of previous events, and closed causal loops is shown to generate logical contradictions and violations of causal consistency. The analysis critically examines major theoretical approaches related to time travel and retrocausality, including closed timelike curves, Novikov’s self-consistency principle, Deutsch’s quantum closed timelike curve model, and the two-state vector formalism in quantum mechanics. The paper argues that while some interpretations may mathematically describe retrocausal correlations, none currently provide an operational mechanism for backward information transmission without encountering paradoxes or information-theoretic inconsistencies. The framework further connects the causal structure of spacetime with the thermodynamic arrow of time, emphasizing the role of entropy, light cone geometry, and information propagation in preserving temporal coherence. The work also explores broader philosophical implications concerning the nature of time, consciousness, causality, and agency within a causally structured universe. Rather than proposing a new physical force or replacing existing theories, this paper provides a logically structured analysis of why temporal observation is compatible with known physics while active temporal intervention remains fundamentally constrained by both physical law and logical consistency.
Common introduction to all the records of this series. The content of this record follows below. Mathematical Materiality (MM) in brief. Why are the laws of physics the same everywhere and at every instant, even though nothing forces matter to obey them? MM proposes an answer: the laws are not rules imposed on matter from the outside; rather, matter itself is made of mathematical relations. And mathematics cannot change: a relation binds two distinct terms everywhere and always. In logic, nothing exists on its own: to exist means to be in relation to another logical entity, and outside this web of relations nothing can exist, not even other universes. This reading already meets experimental measurements at two points. First, the ratio of dark to ordinary matter is read as 3√3 = 5.196; when left free in the fits, Planck and DESI DR2 data give 5.21–5.22 (as registered in record 2.44, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23329080). Second, the acceleration scale of galaxies is read as a₀ = cH₀/6, the same scale that appears in Verlinde's emergent gravity: the computed value is 1.09–1.18 × 10⁻¹⁰ m/s² against the measured value of 1.20 (record 2.46.1, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23506655). Both readings were formulated with the measurements already known; the tests to check them against future data are registered in the same records. In the first logical nexus between space and time — which became homogeneous with Einstein — there is a non-local phase, made only of a pure logical distinction: space is not time. Between the two there is no relation of quantitative calculation, only the logical entity they have in common, which is needed to make them exist with respect to each other. This level is not distant: it is present in every phase of reality, in every place and at every instant. It shows in entanglement, where two distant systems remain correlated more strongly than any explanation based on separate properties and free of faster-than-light influences allows, without anything physically travelling between them. In this non-local phase the two distinct terms, space and time, share only one logical element, which we shall call their greatest common divisor (GCD), just as the numbers 3 and 5 have only 1 in common. The local world arises when a relation is counted through this GCD: its multiples and its fractions form a matrix. Seen by an observer inside the system like us, the multiples appear as time and the fractions as space. When that same multiple is directly contained in the matrix of the point of observation, it turns into mass — that is, into concrete matter as we usually understand it. There is therefore a close link between time and mass, in full agreement with Einstein's relativity, which ties mass to spacetime. The observed objects, while being logically autonomous entities in their local relations, enter into relation with the observer through a logical diffraction — that is, a decomposition into fractions — of the observer's matrix. This reading also gives a reason for the limit of the speed of light, which in Einstein's relativity is instead taken as a starting principle. The speed of light is the fixed exchange rate between the multiples and the fractions of the same GCD, meaning how much space a single step of time is worth: exceeding it would mean, for some observer, covering space without counting time, and thus leaving the local world. Logic always starts from a logical relative, and this exchange rate has nothing absolute in itself either: it is a necessary relative which, inside the system, becomes an absolute hypothesis, the same for everyone and impossible to exceed. Outside the system, by contrast, it has no justification at all, because outside there is only non-existence: justifying something requires another term to relate it to, and out there there is none. Asking for a reason from outside is like asking what lies north of the North Pole. The same theoretical framework that reads space, time, mass and the observed objects also admits quantum mechanics. The non-local phase and the mirror-like logical reciprocity between the two ends of the nexus give a reason for the probabilistic behaviour of matter. When the observed object is large enough, its mass fixes it in the matrix of the point of observation: for this reason we see it in one precise place and at one precise instant. When instead the object falls below a certain mass threshold, the principal GCD (that of the point of observation) and the GCD of the diffraction that generates the object are forced to become equal, reflecting each other as in a mirror. At that point the object no longer occupies a single point of the spacetime generated by the observer, but spreads over several possible positions, and we observe it as probability. It is like having to describe the number 10 using only the number 1: the only way is to distribute the 1 over ten positions, one for each unit of the 10. Today we know that even objects made of thousands of atoms behave in this way, and no experiment has yet found the boundary. The idea that the passage from quantum to classical behaviour depends on mass is close to that of Penrose and Diósi; in MM the threshold is the point where the two GCDs, the principal one and that of the local diffraction, become equal. For all these reasons the universe behaves like a simulation without really being one. It follows exact rules, made of counts, everywhere and at every instant, but no machine runs them and no programmer wrote them: a structure of mathematical relations does not need to be computed in order to exist. Tegmark (2008) had already noted that such a simulation need not be run, while Vazza (2025) estimated that running it physically on a machine would require resources that the very laws of the universe do not allow. The work is shared openly so that it can be judged by as many readers as possible: anyone who knows someone interested can pass on this single link, valid for the whole framework (with an overview in English and Italian): https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23535916. The entry page, with the complete list of all records, is https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22667516. To cite the framework: Lanciano, U. (2026). The number 1 in front of the mirror: Mathematical Materiality from the nexus to the cosmos. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23535916. The records have been deposited since 5 August 2026, each with its own date, and are released under CC BY 4.0: anyone may use them by citing the source. Objections and errors found are welcome at riverantares@gmail.com, since Zenodo has no space for comments. This record contains the four-page summary of the framework, in English and in Italian: the question of why physical laws hold everywhere with nothing to enforce them; the Great Reversal; the non-local phase and its empirical trace in Bell-type experiments; the five postulates with the example of 3 and 5; the matrix; the equals sign as a mirror; a clock made of 3 and 5, whose two means give Einstein's slowing of moving clocks (a known identity: Bondi 1964; Knuth and Bahreyni 2014); and the comparison with two measured numbers. The full overview, with the list of all records, is at DOI 10.5281/zenodo.22667516. The author is not a professional physicist; the framework and its premises are the author's own. The texts were written with the help of AI assistants. There has been no review by human referees.
Quantum entanglement, a phenomenon where two or more particles become linked and share the same fate regardless of the distance separating them, has long captivated the imaginations of physicists and science fiction enthusiasts alike. This paper explores the potential of utilizing quantum entanglement to investigate the theoretical possibility of time travel, presenting a novel theoretical framework centered around the concept of time dilation induced by entanglement. We argue that by meticulously simulating time dilation effects within entangled systems, we can potentially unlock insights into the fundamental nature of spacetime and, consequently, the feasibility of manipulating time itself. While this research remains highly speculative, it serves as a foundation for exploring a fundamentally new approach to temporal mechanics, moving beyond the limitations of traditional models.
This record. Twelve phenomena, entanglement among them, read through the same non-local phase: «non-local» as not located in space and time, not as action at a distance. Reading path: Foundations: why the laws hold, 5 of 5 · before: Is mass a contained rhythm? · all themes. Common introduction to all the records of this series. The content of this record follows below. Mathematical Materiality (MM) in brief. Why are the laws of physics the same everywhere and at every instant, even though nothing forces matter to obey them? MM proposes an answer: the laws are not rules imposed on matter from the outside; rather, matter itself is made of mathematical relations. And mathematics cannot change: a relation binds two distinct terms everywhere and always. In logic, nothing exists on its own: to exist means to be in relation to another logical entity, and outside this web of relations nothing can exist, not even other universes. This reading already meets experimental measurements at two points. First, the ratio of dark to ordinary matter is read as 3√3 = 5.196; when left free in the fits, Planck and DESI DR2 data give 5.21–5.22 (as registered in record 2.44, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23329080). Second, the acceleration scale of galaxies is read as a₀ = cH₀/6, the same scale that appears in Verlinde's emergent gravity: the computed value is 1.09–1.18 × 10⁻¹⁰ m/s² against the measured value of 1.20 (record 2.46.1, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23506655). Both readings were formulated with the measurements already known; the tests to check them against future data are registered in the same records. In the first logical nexus between space and time — which became homogeneous with Einstein — there is a non-local phase, made only of a pure logical distinction: space is not time. Between the two there is no relation of quantitative calculation, only the logical entity they have in common, which is needed to make them exist with respect to each other. This level is not distant: it is present in every phase of reality, in every place and at every instant. It shows in entanglement, where two distant systems remain correlated more strongly than any explanation based on separate properties and free of faster-than-light influences allows, without anything physically travelling between them. In this non-local phase the two distinct terms, space and time, share only one logical element, which we shall call their greatest common divisor (GCD), just as the numbers 3 and 5 have only 1 in common. The local world arises when a relation is counted through this GCD: its multiples and its fractions form a matrix. Seen by an observer inside the system like us, the multiples appear as time and the fractions as space. When that same multiple is directly contained in the matrix of the point of observation, it turns into mass — that is, into concrete matter as we usually understand it. There is therefore a close link between time and mass, in full agreement with Einstein's relativity, which ties mass to spacetime. The observed objects, while being logically autonomous entities in their local relations, enter into relation with the observer through a logical diffraction — that is, a decomposition into fractions — of the observer's matrix. This reading also gives a reason for the limit of the speed of light, which in Einstein's relativity is instead taken as a starting principle. The speed of light is the fixed exchange rate between the multiples and the fractions of the same GCD, meaning how much space a single step of time is worth: exceeding it would mean, for some observer, covering space without counting time, and thus leaving the local world. Logic always starts from a logical relative, and this exchange rate has nothing absolute in itself either: it is a necessary relative which, inside the system, becomes an absolute hypothesis, the same for everyone and impossible to exceed. Outside the system, by contrast, it has no justification at all, because outside there is only non-existence: justifying something requires another term to relate it to, and out there there is none. Asking for a reason from outside is like asking what lies north of the North Pole. The same theoretical framework that reads space, time, mass and the observed objects also admits quantum mechanics. The non-local phase and the mirror-like logical reciprocity between the two ends of the nexus give a reason for the probabilistic behaviour of matter. When the observed object is large enough, its mass fixes it in the matrix of the point of observation: for this reason we see it in one precise place and at one precise instant. When instead the object falls below a certain mass threshold, the principal GCD (that of the point of observation) and the GCD of the diffraction that generates the object are forced to become equal, reflecting each other as in a mirror. At that point the object no longer occupies a single point of the spacetime generated by the observer, but spreads over several possible positions, and we observe it as probability. It is like having to describe the number 10 using only the number 1: the only way is to distribute the 1 over ten positions, one for each unit of the 10. Today we know that even objects made of thousands of atoms behave in this way, and no experiment has yet found the boundary. The idea that the passage from quantum to classical behaviour depends on mass is close to that of Penrose and Diósi; in MM the threshold is the point where the two GCDs, the principal one and that of the local diffraction, become equal. For all these reasons the universe behaves like a simulation without really being one. It follows exact rules, made of counts, everywhere and at every instant, but no machine runs them and no programmer wrote them: a structure of mathematical relations does not need to be computed in order to exist. Tegmark (2008) had already noted that such a simulation need not be run, while Vazza (2025) estimated that running it physically on a machine would require resources that the very laws of the universe do not allow. This record develops one aspect of the theoretical framework. The work is shared openly so that it can be judged by as many readers as possible: anyone who knows someone interested can pass on this single link, valid for the whole framework (with an overview in English and Italian): https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23535916. The entry page, with the complete list of all records, is https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22667516. To cite the framework: Lanciano, U. (2026). The number 1 in front of the mirror: Mathematical Materiality from the nexus to the cosmos. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23535916. The records have been deposited since 5 August 2026, each with its own date, and are released under CC BY 4.0: anyone may use them by citing the source. Objections and errors found are welcome at riverantares@gmail.com, since Zenodo has no space for comments. This record. In physics «non-locality» mostly names one fact: the correlations of entanglement. In Mathematical Materiality (MM) it is the foundation: a non-local phase, not located in space and time and present everywhere, of which the local world is the count made from a point. Here «non-local» means not located in space and time; it does not mean action at a distance. This record collects, from MM's published records and the author's premises, twelve phenomena in which MM's reading uses the same non-local phase as the reason, and shows that entanglement is the case in which it rests most directly on a measured datum, not the only one. There are no new calculations: the result is the unity of the reading. The twelve phenomena: the correlations of entanglement beyond Bell's limit, and their Tsirelson ceiling, set by the local reading (MM 2.48, 2.48.1); the same laws everywhere and always, as copies of the same nexus (MM 2.68); identical particles, as the same unit counted twice (a proposal of the AI); the objects two observers see alike, as two counts of one non-local relation (MM 2.62.1); the boundary of the local as a number of copies, not a distance (August status report, reread); probability and the Born rule (MM 2.48.1); the mass below which an object stops being at one point (MM 2.66); the present, and the loop in which the future chooses what is written (MM 2.48, 2.68.1); space and time themselves: a clock counting events without pre-assigned places runs at Einstein's proper time (MM 2.40.2); the limit of light, the same for everyone; dark matter as the ordinary matter of a second mirror, with no reciprocal non-local link to us (MM 2.44); the boundary within which a gravitating system reads only its own field, set by the Galaxy (MM 2.70). How each is set out. For every phenomenon: what is observed, with sources; how known physics reads it; what the non-local phase does; where the link comes from (already written in a deposit, a premise of the author, or a proposal of the AI); what rests on calculations already deposited; what remains open. In ten phenomena the link is already in the deposits or in the author's premises; in one it comes partly from the AI, and in one from the AI alone. Three ways organise them: copies without distance, existence through a link, and a reading that is always local and partial. What is not claimed. The non-local phase transmits no signals and no influences outside light cones. Today it has no distinct experimental signature: where MM gives numbers, they coincide with known physics (the Tsirelson bound, decoherence, wave optics) or come from readings with declared choices. The record also lists the other senses in which «non-local» appears in MM's records, so that they are not confused with this one. Where the reading is tested. Gaia DR4 in December 2026 (rules registered in MM 2.70) and the mass threshold, with a prediction dated 31 December 2035 (MM 2.66); five open questions from MM 2.68. Contents: REA