AAAS USD Workshop on "Paranormal" Retro-Causation

Jack Sarfatti · science forum Guru Joined: 29 Apr 2005 Posts: 487

Is the Conscious Vacuum Hawking's "Mind of God"?

Fred Alan Wolf: Thanks for all the updates at the conference. ...
I am not sure but I think the last sentence is a self-referral
Russell paradox and if so that anything I say about it must be false,
nonlocal, and due entirely to the arousal of fluctuations in a quantum
field theory which I am currently applying to a model of consciousness.
In short: the vacuum thinks.

My comments here:

Fred's suggestion above does fit my emergent gravity theory in the
e-print archive where smooth curved spacetime is simply a modulation of
the coherent Goldstone phases of the inflation field's world hologram
that has signal nonlocality from its nonlinearity.

?
Flaw in Garret's model that at lease one type of retro-causation
violates Second Law?
The receiver is not a closed system. That is the receiver degrees of
freedom that detect the signal couple to a environmental degrees of
freedom so that total local entropy increase of both sender and receiver
is positive independent of the time order between the sending and
receiving events.

In contrast, a version of Garrett's argument might explain the low
entropy of the early universe as a brane. That is, EM signals from the
future back to the pre-inflation vacuum instability are stuck on the
brane and they do lower the entropy of the universe and indeed are The
Cosmic Trigger causing the inflation in a globally self-consistent loop.
Only the emission of gravity waves across hyperspace to other branes
could increase the entropy of the early universe but curved spacetime
has not yet formed so that there are no gravity waves possible until
post inflation consistent with my

curved tetrads ~ d(Goldstone Phases of Vacuum State Coherent ODLRO
Inflation Field)

in analogy to

superfluid velocity ~ d(Goldstone Phase of Ground State Coherent ODLRO
Condensate Field)

Also back to John Cramer's TI extension of Wheeler-Feynman classical
electrodynamics to quantum waves. The echo from the future absorber is
the trigger for an individual spontaneous emission. That is, the sea of
zero point vacuum fluctuations for the electromagnetic field are simply
advanced pulses from future absorbers. However, the /\zpf wave is
tightly connected to these advanced echo pulses in TI. Also we need to
include all quantum fields not only photons in the composition of the
/\zpf field in

Guv + /\zpfguv = 0 dark energy/matter exotic vacuum field equation.

On No-Go theorem for stand-alone locally decodable entanglement nonlocal
signals that are in fact observed in precognitive remote viewing at
least: Peacock & Hepburn suggest that the Hamiltonian is nonlocal. That
is a loophole. Nick Herbert points out that the proof simply posits
linear superposition. In my POST-quantum macrocopic extension of
micro-quantum theory in Super Cosmos I have a local nonlinear nonunitary
non-probabilistic ODLRO Landau-Ginzburg equation replacing the nonlocal
linear unitary probabilistic Schrodinger equation. That is I have a NEW
theory that is not orthodox quantum theory but is "More is different"
(PW Anderson) emergent from orthodox quantum theory and collapses to
orthodox quantum theory in the appropriate limit analogous to vanishing
curvature in classical relativity. That of course begs the question
raised by John Cramer yesterday that perhaps one can have signal
nonlocality within ordinary quantum theory. The fact of nonlocal signals
in living matter is more and more probably as experiments progress. The
issue here is whether orthodox quantum theory can explain those apparent
facts. The no-cloning theorem prohibits such an explanation. Therefore,
the fact of nonlocal signals shows the violation of orthodox quantum
theory in living matter if the no-cloning theorem is true. This is my
position in Super Cosmos (on Amazon) but John Cramer yesterday suggested
that there may be nonlocal signals within orthodox quantum theory.

On Jun 21, 2006, at 5:06 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:

http://www.fourmilab.ch/rpkp/retro.html
Retro-causation only happens irreversibly according to Garret.
Do we need retro-causation to have the psychological arrow of time? My
comment.
"Noisy process has greater potential retro-PK."
But Garrett assumes that entropy of each participant cannot decrease.
Reversible processes not susceptible to retrocausal influence.
PSI independent of temporal order.
Feedback should not improve PK in Garret's model in which a virtual
decrease in entropy of universe is not allowed - but is that correct? MY
COMMENT
Don't increase S/N ratio DECREASE IT! Spottiswoode observed exactly this
says Dick Bierman. Russell Targ pipes in that they see PK arising from
noise! Tiny jitter goes to zero - condensing random noise oscillations.
Not enough time to properly digest all these rapid fire comments from
several really bright people. Now Ibison is talking that "cause does not
have an objective meaning". Ibison says what I was thinking! That's
good. I mean Ibison says why not the past receiver entropy decreases
before the future sender entropy increases by a greater amount in a
virtual decrease of entropy of the universe. Decision can modulate noise
Garret says.
Russel Targ agrees with me and I think Ibison that Garret's assumption
that there cannot be a temporary virtual decrease of the entropy of the
universe contradicts observed facts such as Ingo Swann precognizing the
Red Chinese test that was a dud (Ingo draws the "uranium bomb" 4 days
BEFORE it happens.) That is, the increase of entropy of the universe is
more accurate as one time averages over longer intervals.
Retro-causation is like a virtual quantum process that temporarily
borrows energy from the vacuum then pays it back. York Dobyns also
agrees with me on this. York is very bright & imaginative BTW.

From Boulder, Colorado New Age Heaven jokes Garrett.
Second law of thermodynamics constraints on the paranormal in general.
In retro-causation the entropy of the past receiver decreases and the
entropy of the future sender increases more than the entropy of the past
receiver decreased - therefore there is a fluctuation that temporarily
lowers the entropy of the universe. Like a quantum virtual process - my
comment.
In ordinary case the entropy of sender increases in the past more than
the receiver's entropy decreases in the future - therefore the entropy
of universe increases - like a real irreversible process.
Some paranormal phenomena are consistent with the second law.
e.g. telepathy - remote healing (and its opposite psychotronic weapons -
MY COMMENT)
Paranormal phenomena that violate second law
e.g. advanced laser signal pulse
advanced observation of an astronomical event
What about Russell Targ's report of Ingo Swann seeing Red Chinese
nuclear test 4 days before it happened in a CIA test at SRI? MY COMMENT

Bilking Intervention Paradox (Max Black 1956) - Killing one's
grandfather too vicious like Schrodinger's Cat and we do not need it. A
softer form e.g. Schmidt recordings.
Moddel's talk is very important. His views need to be considered carefully.

On Jun 21, 2006, at 3:51 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:

Spottiswoode, Bierman & Cramer in front row Cramer in red shirt.
Jean on stage.

Jack--

thanks for this great report on the backwards-causality conference. More
pictures please.

Proof of the no-cloning theorem (Wooters-Zurek) is based on the
linearity of QM

Yes - like in Lenny Susskind's little technical book - seems really
simple. I have not had time to read the paper. Just found out about it a
few hours ago and the meeting is still in progress. Jean Burns is
talking. Have you read the paper below and have you found the flaw? John
Cramer has not found it yet apparently. He does not believe their claim,
but says he cannot yet disprove it within his TI. John showed a picture
of an experiment he designed.

Pictures are from my cell phone - hence low resolution.

not on FTL impossibility, hence not question-begging at all.

Hi to Elizabeth Rauscher & John Cramer.

Nick Herbert

Some background info is at
http://www.fourmilab.ch/rpkp/

On Jun 21, 2006, at 3:15 PM, nick herbert wrote:

Now in my book Super Cosmos I accept the no-cloning theorem because I
did not know about the Peacock-Hepburn paper from 1999 until today
listening to John Cramer's talk.

http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9906036

On Jun 21, 2006, at 2:59 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:

York Dobyns from Princeton PEAR is giving a very pretty lucid synopsis
of the whole field of retro-causality/spatial telepathy/remote-viewing.
Hopefully his slide show will be online.

Retrocausation has been tested and is real - paraphrase of York Dobyns
just now.

What about Block Universe?

Malleable past? Delayed choice. True and one time, not ever true at a
later time?

All our memories reflect the current state of the past? Right out of PK
Dick & Jorge Luis Borges!

Indeterminate past - many worlds view.

Future boundary conditions (transaction) past event measures the future.
Some fixed future events as boundary conditions i.e. "destiny matrix" MY
COMMENT

Puthoff & Targ "Associative Remote Viewing" actively done allegedly by
the military today.

Precognitive Remote Perception - "agents sometimes report redirection of
intention during a trial"

For the record I first got the idea that EPR entanglement might be used
for signaling faster than light from reading a paper on Tau-Theta meson
puzzle in Rev Mod Physics by David Inglis 1960 while a grad student at
Brandeis with Stan Klein. I was told by the professors not to think
about this problem - like The Vatican telling Stephen Hawking not to
think about the birth of the universe? Wink

In any case I was getting
anticipations of Bell's theorem in 1961 on my own but this glimpse of an
idea was not encouraged. See Martin Gardner's "Magic and Paraphysics" in
"Science, Good, Bad and Bogus" for documentation of this period as well
as the first edition of Zukav's "The Dancing Wu Li Masters" - it is
beginning to look like I was simply 50 years ahead of my time. Too soon
to tell of course.

Now in my book Super Cosmos I accept the no-cloning theorem because I
did not know about the Peacock-Hepburn paper from 1999 until today
listening to John Cramer's talk.

PS
"Imaginary Weapons" Sharon Weinberger:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1560258497/fourmilabwwwfour

about the DARPA hafnium isomer episode.

You are mentioned on pages 11-15 (in fact, your name, in bold type, is
the first two words of chapter 2) in connection with your work with
Bethe, and also on page 220 as the person who indirectly put the author
in connection with Eric W. Davis.

On Jun 21, 2006, at 10:05 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:

John Cramer BLOWS MY MIND (as did Elitzur yesterday and Edelman day
before) - casts doubt on NO-CLONING gives ammunition for my final
remarks in my archive paper on seeing through the horizons to the
parallel universes next door! Makes Lenny Susskind's arguments suspect
to the extent they depend on no-cloning. Also casts doubt on quantum
cryptography and makes A. Valentini's papers more important!

Peacock and Hepburn show these no-cloning theorems are tautological!
This gets back to where I was in 1970's and to Nick Herbert's FLASH and
casts doubt on no-cloning theorem?

"Now I am not so sure we cannot use orthodox quantum mechanics to send
messages backwards in time - also faster than light across spacelike
distances." paraphrase of John Cramer a mere moment ago! [PS Gary Zukav
erased my comments on all this in 1979 in the early editions of "Dancing
Wu Li Masters" - so basically my old position from 1970's may have been
correct - too soon to tell of course - The Pendulum swings the other way
in The Pit.]

Cramer has a new version of the Dopfer experiment. Cramer thinks it will
not work but really cannot prove it will not work in his TI.

Rev Mod Phys 58, 647 (1986)

quant-ph/0507089 "Time and the Instant"

Power Point of Cramer's talk is at

http://faculty.washington.edu/jcramer

Reverse Causation
Quantum interpretations
How to send messages back in time by 50 microseconds.
Interpretation of a formalism needs to link symbols to
operations/observables.
Should neutralize paradoxes - ALL of them.
Tools for visualization, speculation & extension
It should not make its own testable predictions nor have its own
sub-formalism. But it should be falsifiable.

e.g. f = ma

interpretation is necessary to give the symbols meaning.

Transactional Interpretation = TI

QM matrix element is a psi* ... psi sandwich
Complex conjugation is Wigner operator for time reversal

i.e. retarded to advanced quantum bit waves

retarded wave carries positive energy to future

Impose ad-hoc retarded boundary condition.

Wheeler-Feynman (1/2)retarded + (1/2)advanced

time symmetry

Emitter sends both retarded and advanced waves to future and past
respectively

Absorber responds with advanced wave back to emitter that confirms the
transaction and it cancels the advanced wave from emitter leaving only a
time loop hand shake.

This is all on light cone for massless EM waves of course!

Cramer takes this idea to quantum waves - but their phase speeds are
OUTSIDE light cone! MY COMMENT.

No explicit observers.

No paradoxes? See Elitzur yesterday on the "Russell Quantum Liar
Paradox" not yet analyzed by Cramer.

Completed transaction projects out the eigenstate of the observable
automatically. Born probability rule explained "echo" from each
potential absorber.

No need for collapse of Copenhagen interpretation.

TI CAN'T BE TESTED it is part of orthodox micro-quantum theory.

Quantum Paradoxes

Rev Mod Phys 1986
Foundations in Physics 2005

1. Einstein's Bubble: Isotropic emission from point source - spherical
wave instantly "collapses" in a local detection. Bohm's pilot
wave-hidden variable solves this trivially! MY COMMENT
Heisenberg has "knowledge wave" - but that is no good - very mystical.

Cramer gives to my mind an unconvincing explanation compared to Bohm's.

2. Wheeler's Delayed Choice - also trivial in Bohm's interpretation not
needing any retro-causality however. MY COMMENT -- too quick to evaluate
Cramer who is rushing his talk for lack of time.

3. Down conversion with LiIO3 to make EPR entangled photon pairs -
travel together in same direction at 702.2 nanometers

Dopher's P-X EPR experiment Innsbruck 1998

Double slit in one path for P or X measurement, Heisenberg lens in other
path for X or P measurement. Suggests a nonlocal signal - violating QM.

General theorems show this experiment should not work inside of QM.

Peacock and Hepburn show these no-cloning theorems are tautological!
This gets back to where I was in 1970's and to Nick Herbert's FLASH and
casts doubt on no-cloning theorem?

Cramer has a new version of the Dopfer experiment. Cramer thinks it will
not work but really cannot prove it will not work in his TI.

Google