This is all for orthodox QM in which Sutherland’s post-quantum action-reaction source terms are set to zero.
Aharonov wrote:
"Retrocausal models of quantum mechanics add
further weight to the conflict between causality
and the possible existence of free will. We analyze
a simple closed causal loop ensuing from the interaction
between two systems with opposing thermodynamic
time arrows, such that each system can forecast
future events for the other. The loop is avoided
by the fact that the choice to abort an event thus
forecasted leads to the destruction of the forecaster’s
past. Physical law therefore enables prophecy of future
events only as long as this prophecy is not revealed
to a free agent who can otherwise render it
false. This resolution is demonstrated on an earlier
finding derived from the two-state vector formalism,
where a weak measurement’s outcome anticipates a
future choice, yet this anticipation becomes apparent
only after the choice has been actually made.”
Jack: In post-quantum theory, with action-reaction between pilot waves and their system of particles and classical gauge fields, this is no longer true.
The message from the future is locally decoded before
the future choice is made, but only IF it will be made.
This is Novikov loop in time.
The Novikov self-consistency principle, also known as the Novikov self-consistency conjecture, is a principle developed by Russian physicist Igor Dmitriyevich Novikovin the mid-1980s to solve the problem of paradoxes in time travel, which is theoretically permitted in certain solutions of general relativity (solutions containing what are known as closed timelike curves). The principle asserts that if an event exists that would give rise to a paradox, or to any "change" to the past whatsoever, then the probability of that event is zero. It would thus be impossible to create time paradoxes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novikov_self-consistency_principle
Evidence is seen in brain-presponse, retro PK, and remote-viewing experiments.
Of course the “rhinos” automatically debunk that evidence e.g.
As fringe science[edit]
Outside the mainstream scientific community, retrocausality has also been proposed as a mechanism to explain purported anomalies, paranormal events or personal events, but mainstream scientists generally[vague] regarded these explanations as pseudoscientific. Most notably, parapsychologist Helmut Schmidt presented quantum mechanical justifications for retrocausality,[34] eventually claiming that experiments had demonstrated the ability to manipulate radioactive decay through retrocausal psychokinesis.[35]These results and their underlying theory have been rejected by the mainstream scientific community,[36][37] although they continue to have some support from fringe sciencesources.[38]
Richard Shoup explained in his paper entitled "Understanding Retrocausality: Can a Message be Sent to the Past?" [41] that psychologist Daryl J. Bem of Cornell conducted an experiment that would show a subject two sets of curtains with a picture behind one of them. The subject "guesses" and the curtains are revealed. The computer simulating this experiment would not "know" which curtain contained the picture until after the guess was made. While most of the results led to near chance at 50%, the results showed a higher margin of success (p. 17) for the subset of erotic images — 53.1%. Those who would score above the midpoint and were considered "stimulus-seeking" according to a pre-screening questionnaire would end up scoring even higher — 57.6%. It would seem that a person's "want-level" alters the outcome of the experiment, even if the alteration was not significant.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retrocausality#As_fringe_science
Whether the skeptic accepts this or not, it does show that post-quantum retrocausality is Popper falsifiable in principle.