I will include this in Destiny Matrix 2010.
Why do you include Susskind? He has the hologram idea with 't Hooft, but I think they mean the past-particle horizon not the dark energy de Sitter asymptotic future event horizon if they have even bothered to think of when the hologram is? Perhaps I am mistaken. Reference? See below on my new gedankexperiment conceived a few moments ago increasing brain blood flow on machines at the Club.
Note - the key issue is signal nonlocality - do all the interpretations permit extensions of themselves to include it in more general theories when some of the constraining axioms of orthodox quantum theory are removed?
Consider both Aspect experiment across spacelike intervals outside the relevant local light cones as well as the timelike version of Aharonov and Vaidman et-al inside the relevant sets of light cones with pre and post-selection (here we simplify and ignore the intermediate measurement - not doing weak measurements - a composite of two timelike EPR correlations.
The quantum correlation of photon polarizations in all of these cases will be essentially sin^2(Theta). But what is Theta?
Theta = theta(Alice) - theta(Bob)
at the events A & B of actual irreversible single photon (ideal case) detections of an individual pair. Practically we will use short entangled laser pulses - some changes in the details).
OK in Aspect experiment A & B are spacelike separated.
In Aharonov type experiment A & B are timelike separated.
Ignore gravity curvature.
Let Alice be an active sender of a real message like the price of Apple stock at a certain moment. Bob is a passive receiver. Since we are only using passion at a distance with signal locality (sub-quantal thermal equilibrium of the nonlocal hidden variables) Alice and Bob locally see random white noise as pairs of photons are emitted back to back to them.
Now let Alice encode the Apple stock price according to a standard protocol in the time series theta(Alice(t)) where t is the time of irreversible detection of a photon by Alice. Similarly, theta(Bob(t')) where t' is the time of irreversible detection of the precise twin of Alice's photon. In general t =/= t' also the flight paths from the source of pairs to the detectors are different and can be adjusted with delay lines to either spacelike or timelike at will.
This is a variation on Wheeler's delayed choice experiment.
Suppose t (Alice) > t'(Bob) in the invariant timelike sense.
Also suppose t(Alice) - t'(Bob) = 1 week! The source emits a pair at t" < t'(Bob).
So on Sept 14 Alice sends a sequence of theta(Alice) that encodes the Apple stock price on Sept 14 - where Bob's twin photons are detected on Sept 7!
True, Alice and Bob locally see random white noise on Sept 14 and Sept 7 respectively if they look at their local outputs on their laptops.
But now on Sept 15 a computer does the correlation analysis and out comes the Sept 14 Apple stock price. The only rational conclusion is that information was transmitted backward in time from Sept 14 to Sept 7 - but that information could not be decoded until after Alice made her free will choice to encode the Apple stock price showing on her I Phone APP.
Weird for sure - no alternative rational explanation consistent with free will.
But that's without signal nonlocality.
Russell Targ's report of the CIA SRI precognitive remote viewing of the Chinese nuclear bomb test, for example, is signal nonlocality violating orthodox QM. That would correspond to Bob seeing the Apple stock price of Sept 14 on Sept 7 without needing to do a hindsight correlation analysis!
On Jul 24, 2010, at 4:34 PM, Creon Levit wrote:
"The long Sciama quote at the end of Saul-Paul's post suggests extensions to what may be the only profound and decent idea I've ever had in fundamental physics: The equivalence, (or complimentarily) of quantum effects in different interpretations of QM.
In the DeBroglie-Bohm interpretation, it is the quantum potential that's responsible for all departures from classical mechanics. In the many-universes interpretation, it is the effects of other universes upon ours which accounts for all nonclassical effects. In the Feynman path integral approach, it is alternative paths. In the Sciama/Good/Susskind/Sarfatti scheme, it is the future boundary conditions. In the Wheeler-Feynman-Cramer picture it is also the future (absorber) boundary condition. In the Bohr-Heisenberg picture, quantum departures from classical causality are "inherent" - i.e. there is no "picture".
So the point is: The future, the quantum potential, the effect of other worlds, and "inherent quantum behavior" are all equivalent. They make equivalent predictions. They produce the equivalent quantum effects. They are complimentary tools in the quantum mechanic's tool-crib. While each might prefer one tool or the other under different circumstances anyone can, in principle, build all of quantum physics with any one of the tools."