Skip

Retrocasuality
November 29, 2006 5:48 AM   Subscribe


 
Cramer is the originator of the The Transactional Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics: wikipedia, overview, paper.
posted by MetaMonkey at 5:49 AM on November 29, 2006


Double.
posted by veedubya at 5:51 AM on November 29, 2006 [14 favorites]


Funny, veedubya. Very funny.
posted by Mr Bismarck at 5:55 AM on November 29, 2006 [1 favorite]


Why experiment? Surely he already knows if his 'experiment' is going to work. That makes it a demonstration.
posted by twine42 at 6:02 AM on November 29, 2006


Ah, it all makes perfect sense now.
posted by Meatbomb at 6:03 AM on November 29, 2006


IANAQM but I don't see how this experiment is expected to demonstrate the correctness of the transactional interpretation. We already know QM implies something weird about the universe. Is it time travel (transactional interpretation), a conscious observer influences reality (various Copenhagen) or that there are parallel universes (Everett, etc)?

It seems that the subscriber to any interpretation can look at the results of the experiment and say, "Yes, that agrees perfectly with what I've been saying."
posted by justkevin at 6:10 AM on November 29, 2006


Booyah!
posted by horsemuth at 6:11 AM on November 29, 2006


Also, the last link is total crap in an otherwise interesting post.
posted by justkevin at 6:13 AM on November 29, 2006


The experiment worked great!

Love, John (from the Future!)

::races off in flying car::
posted by moonbiter at 6:19 AM on November 29, 2006


I heard about this last week.
posted by Faint of Butt at 6:22 AM on November 29, 2006


Meh. Even Cramer admits it probably wont work and you certainly wont be able to transmit information into the past. This is all showmanship to get his Transactional Interpretation back into the spotlight. Basically, he was the only one to run with Feynman and Wheeler's ideas about time-symmetrical Maxwell's equations as well as Wheeler's ideas on delayed choice.

There's nothing wrong with saying that we are in some sense "creating" the past by observing the present but so far the idea hasnt led to any practical conclusions.

Also I find Kathyrn Cramer's "My daddy is so cool!" angle more than a bit annoying. What is she, 12 years old?
posted by vacapinta at 6:28 AM on November 29, 2006


Dwight, this is future Dwight. Don't drink the coffee!
posted by Crash at 6:29 AM on November 29, 2006


retrocausality; retrocasuality would be like going back in time and killing your grandfather. Well, I suppose I can see the confusion.
posted by kimota at 6:33 AM on November 29, 2006


Cramer is the originator of the The Transactional Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics

I didn't realize that was the same guy! I have to look into this now, I admire the TI.
posted by sonofsamiam at 6:37 AM on November 29, 2006


The first rule about taunting the Eschaton is DO NOT TAUNT THE ESCHATON.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 6:41 AM on November 29, 2006


Is this a Pepsi Blue for that new Denzel Washington movie?
posted by spock at 6:59 AM on November 29, 2006


No, kimota; quantum retrocasuality would be showing up for work in the lab in a powder blue leisure suit.
posted by yhbc at 7:29 AM on November 29, 2006 [1 favorite]


Well, I read through his material and didn't see a mention of a flux capacitor so while he's on the right track it should be a bit before he is able to... wait, now I do remember a flux capacitor being included in his design work. That's weird. Also, I am trapped in an unhappy marriage with 5 kids that I wasn't in 10 minutes ago. Well, in any case, it's a great idea to keep fooling around with potential time travel experiments. I tell ya, I've loved physics ever since it brought us A-Bomb!
posted by Mentallo The Brain God at 7:31 AM on November 29, 2006


...but will the dinosaurs be able to construct an asteroid defelction system that really works? The Jurassic wonders.
posted by CynicalKnight at 7:56 AM on November 29, 2006


No Flux Capacitor, but there is a Coincidence Circuit, and Heisenberg Lens and Heisenberg Detector. Wait, no Heisenberg Compensator?
posted by ObscureReferenceMan at 8:03 AM on November 29, 2006


I heard about this last week.

I knew you were going to say that; I read it on QuantuMetaFilter yesterday.
posted by ZenMasterThis at 8:12 AM on November 29, 2006


I heard about it next week
posted by jfuller at 8:56 AM on November 29, 2006


Finally, a solution for Iraq presents itself.
posted by Slarty Bartfast at 9:16 AM on November 29, 2006


Will this make it possible to do the nasty in the pasty?
posted by SBMike at 9:50 AM on November 29, 2006 [2 favorites]


Why bother? He knows it doesn't work or it would have already worked, and he'd know by now.

Right?

This stuff makes my head hurt.

Will this make it possible to do the nasty in the pasty?
posted by SBMike at 11:50 AM CST on November 29


No, but it would allow you to send the girl you banged last Saturday a message ahead of time telling her not to have sex with you because you have herpes.

You've already slept with her, and had a good time, so who cares if one of your outer-dimensional selves doesn't get any?
posted by Ynoxas at 10:18 AM on November 29, 2006


Could you totally mess with your future/past/other self by, after getting the signal from the future, totally go PSYCH!!! and not send it later? Or would that rip a hole in spacetime or something?
posted by luriete at 11:22 AM on November 29, 2006


Can we wait to try this kind of shit AFTER we have built a base on the moon to host these experiments.

Because one of four things is bound to happen:

1) Nothing.

2) Exactly what the scientist expected.

3) Multi-dimensional portal opens and a horde of flesh-eating and freakishly strong monsters— invulnerable to our weapons— come pouring out.

4) My consciousness— and ONLY mine— will be beamed back into my twelve year old body and I will have re-live the nightmare of middle school all over again.

So. Vote for Proposition 27 "Moon Base Levy" on your special elections ballot!
posted by tkchrist at 11:35 AM on November 29, 2006 [2 favorites]


Retrocasuality? Is that like the Members Only jacket I bought off eBay?
posted by pax digita at 11:52 AM on November 29, 2006


He really wants to do that one night at the comedy club over again, doesn't he?
posted by designbot at 2:22 PM on November 29, 2006 [1 favorite]


I went to the Causal Inference Seminar in Snowbird back in '01. The van driver who picked us up at the airport asked if we were with that "casual interference" group. We said, "Yes."
posted by Mental Wimp at 4:47 PM on November 29, 2006


The past is dead, and by the time you try to record the present, it's in the past. The only place we can go — one moment at a time — is the future.
posted by cenoxo at 6:16 PM on November 29, 2006


retrocausality; retrocasuality would be like going back in time and killing your grandfather.

naw, that'd be retrocasualtiality, the complex of actions engaged to create a retrocasualty.

retrocasuality is more like going back in time to warn the Dude not to drink the White Russian at the beach house, but in a suitably low-key way.
posted by mwhybark at 8:54 PM on November 29, 2006


Can "retrosexual" be far behind (or would it be "ahead")?
posted by spock at 8:59 PM on November 30, 2006


« Older The Next Great Guitar God?   |   50 capitals in 50 days Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments



Post