This record contains two preprints and their supplementary material, in English and Italian, together with the code and LaTeX sources that reproduce every number and figure. Toward controlled retrocausal communication: the successive-rewriting model and its bottleneck (main paper). Can information be sent to the past? With known physics it cannot; the possibility is not, however, excluded a priori, and the Temporal Radio project asks what would be needed. We show that the bottleneck has a single root: making even a single controllable bit appear in the past without a cause in that past. We show it through the author's successive-rewriting model, formulated with declared premises: a message that reaches the past alters the causal chain, reality is perturbed and resettles, overwriting the future, and a protected log numbers the versions and guides the senders. We formalize it as a dynamics over the versions, in which consistency is not an imposed principle but the equilibrium between settling and the senders' choices; a toy model shows that the author's rule of intervening only for a serious reason allows the succession to stop despite a strong butterfly effect. The bottleneck appears in two forms. The first is the channel: the message must reach the past on a physical signal, which we discuss as a hypothesis in terms of the advanced component of the electromagnetic field; two entangled particles supply a key that only the receiver can use, but reduce neither the amount of information to be sent back nor the difficulty. The second is the persistence of information across versions: with a protected log the model makes a conditional prediction that distinguishes it from Novikov consistency, the alternating entries left by the paradoxical protocol. Future boundary conditions and feedback loops: two solvable models that send no signal to the past (companion note). In models with boundary conditions in the future it is easy to mistake a global dependence for a signal to the past. Two elementary, solvable models make the distinction explicit: two coupled linear oscillators with data at both ends, and a scalar field crossing the throat of an Ellis wormhole placed in a feedback loop. An operational criterion in five conditions organizes what each model does and does not show. The supplementary material contains the catalogue of models, the verification register with the evidence level of every number, and a guide to the computation package. The work was carried out with the assistance of an AI model, as declared in the papers.
This record contains two preprints and their supplementary material, in English and Italian, together with the code and LaTeX sources that reproduce every number and figure. Toward controlled retrocausal communication: the successive-rewriting model and its bottleneck (main paper). Can information be sent to the past? With known physics it cannot; the possibility is not, however, excluded a priori, and the Temporal Radio project asks what would be needed. We show that the bottleneck has a single root: making even a single controllable bit appear in the past without a cause in that past. We show it through the author's successive-rewriting model, formulated with declared premises: a message that reaches the past alters the causal chain, reality is perturbed and resettles, overwriting the future, and a protected log numbers the versions and guides the senders. We formalize it as a dynamics over the versions, in which consistency is not an imposed principle but the equilibrium between settling and the senders' choices; a toy model shows that the author's rule of intervening only for a serious reason allows the succession to stop despite a strong butterfly effect. The bottleneck appears in two forms. The first is the channel: the message must reach the past on a physical signal, which we discuss as a hypothesis in terms of the advanced component of the electromagnetic field; two entangled particles supply a key that only the receiver can use, but reduce neither the amount of information to be sent back nor the difficulty. The second is the persistence of information across versions: with a protected log the model makes a conditional prediction that distinguishes it from Novikov consistency, the alternating entries left by the paradoxical protocol. Future boundary conditions and feedback loops: two solvable models that send no signal to the past (companion note). In models with boundary conditions in the future it is easy to mistake a global dependence for a signal to the past. Two elementary, solvable models make the distinction explicit: two coupled linear oscillators with data at both ends, and a scalar field crossing the throat of an Ellis wormhole placed in a feedback loop. An operational criterion in five conditions organizes what each model does and does not show. The supplementary material contains the catalogue of models, the verification register with the evidence level of every number, and a guide to the computation package. The work was carried out with the assistance of an AI model, as declared in the papers.
Beyond Causality: Temporal Geometry, Informational Consistency, and the Foundations of Physical Time What if the deepest mystery of time is not whether the past can be reached, but whether causality itself is more fundamental than the physical laws through which we describe it? For more than a century, modern physics has transformed our understanding of space, time, matter, and information. General relativity revealed that temporal order is inseparable from spacetime geometry. Quantum theory challenged classical intuitions about measurement, correlations, and physical reality. Information theory provided a mathematical language for describing what can be known, transmitted, and recovered. Yet a profound question remains: must every physically consistent universe possess a globally ordered sequence of causes and effects? Beyond Causality investigates this question through an extended mathematical and conceptual study of temporal geometry, informational dependence, retrocausal feedback, and global consistency. Organized into six interconnected parts, this 430-page research monograph develops a framework for examining causal structures beyond conventional temporal ordering. It brings together established results from general relativity, quantum information, causal modeling, and fixed-point theory, while exploring additional mathematical constructions designed to clarify the conditions under which temporally nonstandard information networks can remain internally consistent. Particular attention is devoted to distinguishing mathematical self-consistency from physical realizability, statistical correlation from controllable communication, and unconventional temporal descriptions from genuine violations of operational causality. Among its principal investigations are the geometric and energetic constraints associated with localized chronology-violating spacetime models, the existence and stability of globally consistent informational feedback networks, the behavior of finite stochastic systems under intervention, and the relationship between quantum causal structures and hypothetical retrocausal channels. The work also extends the theoretical research program introduced in Eon Reverser: Toward Temporal Bubble Radio Communication, examining what additional mathematical, physical, and experimental conditions would be required before communication with an earlier receiver record could be considered a meaningful scientific possibility. Analytical derivations, formal propositions, computational examples, and reproducibility materials accompany the discussion. The proposed constructions are explicitly distinguished from established physical results, and no experimental evidence for backward-in-time communication is claimed. The central ambition of this monograph is neither to declare that causality can be violated nor to assume that temporal paradoxes admit a universal resolution. It is to ask a more precise question: what mathematical structures, consistency principles, and observable constraints would a physical theory have to satisfy if causal order were not universally fixed? The possibility that time, information, and causality may possess a deeper relationship than our present formulations reveal remains an open intellectual frontier. Exploring that frontier requires imagination disciplined by mathematics, speculation constrained by physical principles, and theoretical proposals that remain accountable to observation. Beyond Causality is offered as a contribution to that exploration: an attempt to extend the questions we can rigorously formulate, identify the limits of existing models, and provide a foundation for further investigation into the nature of physical time. Keywords: Causality; Temporal Geometry; General Relativity; Retrocausality; Closed Timelike Curves; Quantum Causal Structures; Information Theory; Global Consistency; Fixed-Point Theory; Chronology Protection; Advanced Electromagnetic Response; Eon Reverser.
Overview This deposit contains version 1.0-en of Feedback Loops and Actualization: Memory, Context, and Reshaping the Field of Possibilities in Probabilistic Presentism, a faithful English translation of the published French version 1.0 (4 September 2026). Objective The paper proposes a conceptual formalization of feedback loops within probabilistic presentism. Feedback is not treated as a return from the future to the past, but as a local dynamics of the present: actualized facts leave present traces, these traces modify the local context, and that context reshapes the field of possibilities for subsequent actualizations. Formal proposal The enriched local present is represented by Fn(x)=(sn(x), Mn(x), Cn(x), πn(x)). The scalar π measures a local degree of canalization; it is distinct from the operational kernel K, which carries the detailed distribution and direction of accessible transitions. The minimal loop is sn → A → sn+1 → T → Mn+1 → G → Cn+1 → R → πn+1 → A → sn+2. The proposed relation Θ=f(π) requires calibration before a change in π can receive an identifiable temporal interpretation. Safeguards and limits Feedback is distinguished from retrocausality: the past acts only through traces presently inscribed. An anticipated future does not act; anticipation is a present model of possible futures. The proposal assumes no signalling to the past and no global present, and retains the thermodynamic constraints on memory. The operators A, T, G and R do not yet constitute a complete covariant physical dynamics, and no quantitative law for π is claimed. Status This is a conceptual and programmatic preprint. It proposes a minimal grammar of feedback loops within probabilistic presentism without claiming to provide a complete quantitative theory of dynamical systems, cognition, or quantum measurement. Related works French source, version 1.0: 10.5281/zenodo.22307131 Main preprint: 10.5281/zenodo.18207811 Wave-particle duality and delayed choice: 10.5281/zenodo.18404150 Proper and ontological time: 10.5281/zenodo.22306324 Translation fidelity The English edition preserves all 322 content blocks, 79 headings, 209 mathematical expressions, 14 URLs, numbers, tables, qualifications, appendices and references of the authoritative French source. All 24 rendered pages were visually reviewed.
This essay argues that the phrase “sending a usable message to the past” — the implicit framing of recent popular treatments of post-selected closed timelike curves and related retrocausal proposals — has no possible referent. The argument proceeds from a single premise: the genuineness of agency. A sender whose agency is not genuine is not a sender but an item of illusory furniture in an illusory system, and the scenario dissolves before it begins; the same dissolution overtakes the four-dimensional block universe, in which a fixed past, present, and future leave no open act of sending to perform. Agency is the more general ground: the verdict follows wherever choice is genuine, whatever the surrounding cosmology, while the block secures it only by erasing the chooser. Granting genuine agency, the locus of that agency must be a non-fungible individual, and a genuine choice forecloses the alternatives it passes over. A realized life-path can therefore be neither re-run to a different outcome — which would be a different individual — nor overwritten by a foreclosed sibling; to alter the past is to attempt one of these, and neither is a coherent operation. Three possibilities are canvassed and shown to exhaust the conceptual space: (i) the message changes the past, which requires the substrate of reality to host inconsistent trajectories at unacceptable cost; (ii) the message cannot change the past, in which case the receiver’s behavior was already going to be what it is and “message” is a label attached to a consistent concurrence rather than a transmission; and (iii) the mechanism uses post-selection to filter joint histories such that only the self-consistent ones occur — which on inspection collapses into (ii). These are not three independent possibilities but the three forms any apparent transmission must take once genuine alteration is excluded. The shared feature of (ii) and (iii) is that the apparatus of communication is preserved while its substance — counterfactual force from sender to receiver — is hollowed out. Generalizing to n simultaneous senders strengthens rather than weakens this conclusion. Three implications follow: freedom is genuine but bounded by the world’s consistency conditions; the felt experience of forward-moving time is a survivorship sample of the world’s permissible configurations; and suffering produced by past events cannot be undone by any act directed at the past, because no such act has the informational efficacy it appears to have. The argument is offered as a companion to the Dual-Layered Reality framework, in which logically and sequentially inconsistent trajectories are filtered at the substrate level.
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.
A number of writers have been attracted to the idea that some of the peculiarities of quantum theory might be manifestations of 'backward' or 'retro' causality, underlying the quantum description. This idea has been explored in the literature in two main ways: firstly in a variety of explicit models of quantum systems, and secondly at a conceptual level. This note introduces a third approach, intended to complement the other two. It describes a simple toy model, which, under a natural interpretation, shows how retrocausality can emerge from simple global constraints. The model is also useful in permitting a clear distinction between the kind of retrocausality likely to be of interest in QM, and a different kind of reverse causality, with which it is liable to be confused. The model is proposed in the hope that future elaborations might throw light on the potential of retrocausality to account for quantum phenomena.