Retrocausality

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Retrocausality suggests that much as the present effects the future, the reverse can also happen; the future can effect the present, and the present can effect the past.

1 Retrocausality and supercausality
2 Empirical evidence of retrocausality in psychology
3 Retrocausality, free will and consciousness
4 Paradox
5 References

[edit] Retrocausality and supercausality

In special relativity the energy-momentum relation relates the energy of an object (E) with its momentum (p), and mass (m), where c is the speed of light:

E 2 = p 2 c 2 + m 2 c 4

This equation has a dual energy solution:

± $E = \sqrt{p^2c^2+m^2c^4}$ ,

one positive + E, which moves forward in time, and one negative − E, which moves backward in time. If the momentum is zero then the equation simplifies into the famous

E = m c 2

However, in quantum mechanics, as a consequence of the discovery of the spin of elementary particles, which consists of a momentum (p) which can never be equal to zero, the energy-momentum relation does not simplify as $E = m c 2$ .

In 1926 Klein and Gordon generalized the Schrödinger equation to a relativistic equation, by inserting the energy-momentum relation (the Klein-Gordon equation). In this way, they discovered the existence of a dual wave solution in the D'Alembert operator: retarded potentials which propagate from the past to the future + E and anticipated potentials which propagate from the future to the past − E.

In 1928 Paul Dirac tried to solve the unacceptable negative solution by applying the energy-momentum relation to the study of electrons, turning them into relativistic objects (Dirac equation). But, also in this case, the unwanted negative solution emerged in the form of electrons + E and its antiparticles − E.

In 1942 the Italian mathematician Luigi Fantappiè, noted that the mathematical properties of those phenomena which are determined by past causes (causality, $+ E$ ), such as the physical and chemical processes, are governed by the law of entropy, while the mathematical properties of those phenomena which are attracted towards causes located in the future (retrocausality, $- E$ ), agree with a symmetrical law which Fantappiè named syntropy. Fantappiè immediately recognized the coincidence between the mathematical properties of syntropy and the properties of living systems.

Einstein used the term Übercausalität (supercausality) to refer to this new model of causality and retrocausality.

There is "an open access journal" Syntropy dedicated to the study of retrocausality in the fields of psychology, sociology, economics, ecology and spirituality which can be found in English at [1].

In 1981 Ulisse Di Corpo, working on the law of syntropy and retrocausality, arrived to the formulation of a model of vital needs.

[edit] Empirical evidence of retrocausality in psychology

Various empirical evidence show the existence of retrocausality and anticipatory effects in living systems:

In his article Heart Rate Differences between Targets and Non targets in Intuitive Tasks Tressoldi and coll. report the results of two experiments, aimed at investigating pre-stimuli heart rate changes. In the first experiment a statistical significance of p=0.015 was obtained, while in the second experiment p reached 0.001 (1 possibility out of 1,000 of being wrong when stating the existence of retrocausality). These results support the hypothesis that the heart rate reacts before the stimulus takes place.
In 2003 Spottiswoode and May of the Cognitive Science Laboratory replicated Bierman and Radin (1997) experiments which show an increase in skin conductance 2-3 seconds before emotional stimuli are presented. Spottiswoode and May replicated these results with a statistical significance of p=0.0005 (5 possibilities out of 10,000 of being wrong), and performed controls in order to exclude all possible artifacts and alternative explanations.
In 1979 the Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research Lab (PEAR) was established at Pricenton University under the direction of Robert G Jahn, Dean of the University’s School of Engineering and Applied Sciences. The purpose of this laboratory was to replicate and study anomalous mind/machine interactions when using REG systems (Random Event Generator). PEAR and a consortium of other universities have replicated these results, and are now studying their implications. The anomalous mind/machine interaction which is observed is very simple: REG systems produce ultra-precise gaussian distributions, but when a subject tries to distort these distributions only by the expression of his intentionality, statistically significant deviations are observed. Even more fascinating is the fact that those distributions which have been produced before the subjects expression of intentionality show an amplified effect. The statistical significance of these retrocausal amplifications is p<0.000000001.
Harold Puthoff and Russell Targ experiments coordinated by CIA and DIA (Defense Intelligence Agency) which show retrocausal effects.

Statistical significance such as p<0.000000001 show that, when stating the existence of retrocausality, the risk of being wrong is inferior to 1 possibility (p) out of 1,000,000,000. These results also support the hypothesis that the autonomic nervous system reacts in advance to stimuli and that, in living systems, retrocausality may take the form of emotions.

A tendency to refuse these evidences can be observed on the basis of the assumption that only deterministic cause-effect relations exist. Some suggest that the observer use caution against accepting as scientific the "barely detectable intensities" found in pathological science as described by Irving Langmuir.

[edit] Retrocausality, free will and consciousness

Chris King, in the article “Chaos, Quantum-transactions and Consciousness”, starts from Einstein’s energy-momentum-mass equation, and states that all living systems are constantly faced with bifurcations among causes (+E) and attractors (-E) which force the system into a constant state of choice, a state of free will, which would be common to all the levels and structures of life, from molecules to macrostructures, and organisms. Starting from these premises King suggests an innovative description of consciousness in which it is necessary to definitely refuse any attempt to use mechanical causation and determinism.

[edit] Paradox

Paradox arguments revolve around the possibility of the present altering the past in such a way that the factors which altered the past no longer exist. For instance, if a person traveled backward in time and prevented a parent's birth, that would reverse their own birth and thus prevent them from traveling in time. However, this is not in direct relation to retrocausality as a physical principle, which is theorized to exist at a quantum level, involving atomic and subatomic particles. As such, retrocausality does not necessarily negate deterministic views of the universe, although it should also be noted that determinism is a philosophical concept and not a scientific principle.

[edit] References

Bierman D.J. (1997) e Radin D.I., Anomalous anticipatory response on randomized future conditions. Perceptual and Motr Skills, 84, 689-690.
Dunne B.J. (1995) and Jahn R., Consciousness and Anomalous Physical Phenomena, Princeton University, School of Engineering and Applied Science, Techincal Note PEAR 95004;
King C. (1989), Dual-Time Supercausality, Physics Essays; 2/2 128-151.
King, C. (2003), Chaos, Quantum-transactions and Consciousness, NeuroQuantology 2003; 1: 129-162.
Spottiswoode P. (2003) and May C., Skin Conductance Prestimulus Response: Analyses, Artifacts and a Pilot Study, Journal of Scientific Exploration, Vol. 17, No. 4, 617-641.
Tressoldi P. E. (2005), Martinelli M., Massaccesi S., and Sartori L., Heart Rate Differences between Targets and Nontargets in Intuitive Tasks, Human Physiology, Vol. 31, No. 6, 2005, 646–650.