Seth Lloyd1, Lorenzo Maccone1, Raul Garcia-Patron1, Vittorio Giovannetti2, Yutaka Shikano1,3 wrote
 "Einstein’s theory of general relativity allows the existence
 of closed timelike curves, paths through spacetime
 that, if followed, allow a time traveler – whether human
 being or elementary particle – to interact with her former
 self. ...
 This paper explores a particular
 version of closed timelike curves based on combining
 quantum teleportation with post-selection. The resulting
 post-selected closed timelike curves (P-CTCs) provide
 a self-consistent picture of the quantum mechanics
 of time-travel. ...
 As in
 all versions of time travel, closed timelike curves embody
 apparent paradoxes, such as the grandfather paradox, in
 which the time traveller inadvertently or on purpose performs
 an action that causes her future self not to exist.
 Einstein (a good friend of G¨odel) was himself seriously
 disturbed by the discovery of CTCs [11]. Because the
 theory of P-CTCs rely on post-selection, they provide
 self-consistent resolutions to such paradoxes: anything
 that happens in a P-CTC can also happen in conventional
 quantum mechanics with some probability. Similarly, the
 post-selected nature of P-CTCs allows the predictions
 and retrodictions of the theory to be tested experimentally,
 even in the absence of an actual general-relativistic
 closed timelike curve. ...
 The G¨odel universe consists of a cloud of
 swirling dust, of sufficient gravitational power to support
 closed timelike curves. Later, it was realized that closed
 timelike curves are a generic feature of highly curved, rotating
 spacetimes: the Kerr solution for a rotating black
 hole contains closed timelike curves within the black hole
 horizon; and massive rapidly rotating cylinders typically
 are associated with closed timelike curves [2, 8, 12]. The
 topic of closed timelike curves in general relativity continues
 to inspire debate: Hawking’s chronology protection
 postulate, for example, suggests that the conditions
 needed to create closed timelike curves cannot arise in
 any physically realizable spacetime ...
 Hartle and Politzer pointed out that in the presence
 of closed timelike curves, the ordinary correspondence
 between the path-integral formulation of quantum
 mechanics and the formulation in terms of unitary evolution
 of states in Hilbert space breaks down [5, 7]. Morris
 et al. explored the quantum prescriptions needed to construct
 closed timelike curves in the presence of wormholes,
 bits of spacetime geometry that, like the handle
 of a coffee cup, ‘break off’ from the main body of
 the universe and rejoin it in the the past [4]. Meanwhile,
 Deutsch formulated a theory of closed timelike
 curves in the context of Hilbert space, by postulating
 self-consistency conditions for the states that enter and
 exit the closed timelike curve ...
 Quantum mechanics supports a variety
 of counter-intuitive phenomena which might allow
 time travel even in the absence of a closed timelike curve
 in the geometry of spacetime. ...
 We start from the prescription that time travel
 effectively represents a communication channel from the
 future to the past. ...
 A well-known quantum communication channel is
 given by quantum teleportation, in which shared entanglement
 combined with quantum measurement and classical
 communication allows quantum states to be transported
 between sender and receiver. We show that if
 quantum teleportation is combined with post-selection,
 then the result is a quantum channel to the past. The entanglement
 occurs between the forward- and backward going
 parts of the curve, and post-selection replaces the
 quantum measurement and obviates the need for classical
 communication, allowing time travel to take place. ...
 entanglement and projection can give rise to closed timelike
 curves ...
 Deutsch’s theory has recently
 been critiqued by several authors as exhibiting
 self-contradictory features [33–36]. By contrast, although
 any quantum theory of time travel quantum mechanics
 is likely to yield strange and counter-intuitive results,
 P-CTCs appear to be less pathological [17]. They are
 based on a different self-consistent condition that states
 that self-contradictory events do not happen (Novikov
 principle [29]). ...
 Pegg points out that this can arise because
 of destructive interference of self-contradictory histories
 [22]. ...
 in addition to
 general-relativistic CTCs, our proposed theory can also
 be seen as a theoretical elaboration of Wheeler’s assertion
 to Feynman that ‘an electron is a positron moving
 backward in time’ [16]. In particular, any quantum
 theory which allows the nonlinear process of postselection
 supports time travel even in the absence of general relativistic
 closed timelike curves.
 The mechanism of P-CTCs [17] can be summarized by
 saying that they behave exactly as if the initial state of
 the system in the P-CTC were in a maximal entangled
 state (entangled with an external purification space) and
 the final state were post-selected to be in the same entangled
 state. When the probability amplitude for the transition
 between these two states is null, we postulate that
 the related event does not happen (so that the Novikov
 principle [29] is enforced). ...
 Note that Deutsch’s
 formulation assumes that the state exiting the CTC in
 the past is completely uncorrelated with the chronologypreserving
 variables at that time: the time-traveler’s
 ‘memories’ of events in the future are no longer valid.
 The primary conceptual difference between Deutsch’s
 CTCs and P-CTCs lies in the self-consistency condition
 imposed. ...
 It seems that, based on what is currently known on
 these two approaches, we cannot conclusively choose PCTCs
 over Deutsch’s, or vice versa. Both arise from
 reasonable physical assumptions and both are consistent
 with different approaches to reconciling quantum mechanics
 with closed timelike curves in general relativity.
 A final decision on which of the two is “actually the case”
 may have to be postponed to when a full quantum theory
 of gravity is derived (which would allow to calculate
 from first principles what happens in a CTC) or when
 a CTC is discovered that can be tested experimentally. ...
 [Aharonov's theory]
 Here we briefly comment on the two-state vector formalism
 of quantum mechanics [48, 51]. It is based on
 post-selection of the final state and on renormalizing the
 resulting transition amplitudes: it is a time-symmetrical
 formulation of quantum mechanics in which not only the
 initial state, but also the final state is specified. As such,
 it shares many properties with our post-selection based
 treatment of CTCs. In particular, in both theories it
 is impossible to assign a definite quantum state at each
 time: in the two-state formalism the unitary evolution
 forward in time from the initial state might give a different
 mid-time state with respect to the unitary evolution
 backward in time from the final state. Analogously
 in a P-CTC, it is impossible to assign a definite state
 to the CTC system at any time, given the cyclicity of
 time there ...
 Another aspect that the two-state
 formalism and P-CTCs share is the nonlinear renormalization
 of the states and probabilities. In both cases this
 arises because of the post-selection. In addition to the
 two-state formalism, our approach can also be related to
 weak values [48, 52], since we might be performing measurements
 between when the system emerges from the
 CTC and when it re-enters it. Considerations analogous
 to the ones presented above apply. It would be a mistake,
 however, to think that the theory of post-selected closed
 timelike curves in some sense requires or even singles out
 the weak value theory. Although the two are compatible
 with each other, the theory of P-CTCs is essentially
 a ‘free-standing’ theory that does not give preference to
 one interpretation of quantum mechanics over another. ...
 the non-unitarity comes from the fact that, after the CTC is
 closed, for the chronology-respecting system it will be forever
 inaccessible. The nonlinearity of (9) is more difficult
 to interpret, but is connected with the periodic boundary
 conditions in the CTC. ...
 when quantum fields inside a CTC interact with
 external fields, linearity and unitarity is lost. ...
 Hartle notes
 that CTCs might necessitate abandoning not only unitarity
 and linearity, but even the familiar Hilbert space
 formulation of quantum mechanics [7]. Indeed, the fact
 that the state of a system at a given time can be written
 as the tensor product states of subsystems relies crucially
 on the fact that operators corresponding to spacelike
 separated regions of spacetime commute with each
 other. When CTCs are introduced, the notion of ‘spacelike’
 separation becomes muddied. The formulation of
 closed timelike curves in terms of P-CTCs shows, however,
 that the Hilbert space structure of quantum mechanics
 can be retained. ...
 any quantum theory that allows the nonlinear
 process of projection onto some particular state, such
 as the entangled states of P-CTCs, allows time travel
 even when no spacetime closed timelike curve exists. ...
 projection is a non-linear process that cannot be implemented deterministically
 in ordinary quantum mechanics, it can easily be implemented in a probabilistic fashion.
 Consequently,  the effect of P-CTCs can be tested simply by
 performing quantum teleportation experiments, and by
 post-selecting only the results that correspond to the desired
 entangled-state output. ...
 it might be possible
 to implement time travel even in the absence of a
 general-relativistic closed timelike curve. The formalism
 of P-CTCs shows that such quantum time travel can be
 thought of as a kind of quantum tunneling backwards
 in time, which can take place even in the absence of a
 classical path from future to past. ...
 It has been long known that nonlinear quantum mechanics
 potentially allows the rapid solution of hard problems
 such as NP-complete problems [56]. The nonlinearities
 in the quantum mechanics of closed timelike
 curves is no exception ...
 

 Bennett et al. argue, the programmer who is using a
 Deutschian closed timelike
 curve as part of her quantum computer typically finds
 the output of the curve is completely decorrelated from
 the problem she would like to solve: the curve emits random
 states.
 In contrast, because P-CTCs are formulated explicitly
 to retain correlations with chronology preserving curves,
 quantum computation using P-CTCs do not suffer from
 state-preparation ambiguity. That is not so say that PCTCs
 are computationally innocuous: their nonlinear
 nature typically renormalizes the probability of states in
 an input superposition, yielding to strange and counterintuitive
 effects. For example, any CTC can be used
 to compress any computation to depth one, as shown
 in Fig. 2. Indeed, it is exactly the ability of nonlinear
 quantum mechanics to renormalize probabilities from
 their conventional values that gives rise to the amplification
 of small components of quantum superpositions
 that allows the solution of hard problems. Not least
 of the counter-intuitive effects of P-CTCs is that they
 could still solve hard computational problems with ease!
 The ‘excessive’ computational power of P-CTCs is effectively
 an argument for why the types of nonlinearities
 that give rise to P-CTCs, if they exist, should only
 be found under highly exceptional circumstances such as
 general-relativistic closed timelike curves or black-hole
 singularities. ...
 We have extensively argued that P-CTCs are physically
 inequivalent to Deutsch’s CTCs. In Sec. II we
 showed that P-CTCs are compatible with the pathintegral
 formulation of quantum mechanics. This formulation
 is at the basis of most of the previous analysis
 of quantum descriptions of closed time-like curves, since
 it is particularly suited to calculations of quantum mechanics
 in curved space time. P-CTCs are reminiscent of,
 and consistent with, the two-state-vector and weak-value
 formulation of quantum mechanics. It is important to
 note, however, that P-CTCs do not in any sense require
 such a formulation. ...
 we have argued that, as Wheeler’s picture
 of positrons as electrons moving backwards in time suggests,
 P-CTCs might also allow time travel in spacetimes
 without general-relativistic closed timelike curves. If nature
 somehow provides the nonlinear dynamics afforded
 by final-state projection, then it is possible for particles
 (and, in principle, people) to tunnel from the future to
 the past.
 Finally, in Sec. V we have seen that P-CTCs are computationally
 very powerful, though less powerful than the
 Aaronson-Watrous theory of Deutsch’s CTCs.
 Our hope in elaborating the theory of P-CTCs is that
 this theory may prove useful in formulating a quantum
 theory of gravity, by providing new insight on one of the
 most perplexing consequences of general relativity, i.e.,
 the possibility of time-travel."