Dialogue with Russell Targ on Consciousness & Quantum Theory

In orthodox quantum theory any influence one polarizer has on the other is masked by the statistical averaging one must do over the distant polarizer measurements in the ensemble - so all we see locally is random quantum noise - no image, no conscious experience, no remote viewing etc is possible in quantum theory only unperceived static - this is called "passion at a distance" (aka "signal locality") by Abner Shimony. Stapp gave a simple proof based on the linear unitary time evolution of the quantum waves etc.

We need a new theory beyond quantum theory that contains it as a limit. Bernard Carr describes this in his review article a few years ago.

 "Can Psychical Research Bridge the Gulf Between Matter and Mind?" Bernard Carr Proceedings of the Society for Psychical Research, Vol 59 Part 221 June 2008

One such model is here

Subquantum Information and Computation
Antony Valentini
(Submitted on 11 Mar 2002 (v1), last revised 12 Apr 2002 (this version, v2))
It is argued that immense physical resources - for nonlocal communication, espionage, and exponentially-fast computation - are hidden from us by quantum noise, and that this noise is not fundamental but merely a property of an equilibrium state in which the universe happens to be at the present time. It is suggested that 'non-quantum' or nonequilibrium matter might exist today in the form of relic particles from the early universe. We describe how such matter could be detected and put to practical use. Nonequilibrium matter could be used to send instantaneous signals, to violate the uncertainty principle, to distinguish non-orthogonal quantum states without disturbing them, to eavesdrop on quantum key distribution, and to outpace quantum computation (solving NP-complete problems in polynomial time).
http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0203049

On Jan 15, 2011, at 12:31 PM, Russell Targ wrote:

Dear Jack,
I am writing a book about remote viewing and psi in general, for people who don't believe in ESP.
It is called "Questioning Reality." And it deals with some of the ways in which we misapprehend the phenomenal world.
Below I will spell out the physics problem I am puzzling about.

I say," Nonlocality and entanglement, are now one of the hottest research topics in modern physics. This intriguing phenomenon is explained very clearly by Anton Zeilinger, one of the world’s leading experimentalists in quantum optics, in his 2010 book Dance of the Photons: From Einstein to Teleportation.  Prof. Zeilinger writes, 'Entanglement describes the phenomenon that two particles may be so intimately connected to each other that the measurement of one instantly changes the quantum state of the other, no matter how far away it may be.... This nonlocality is exactly what Albert Einstein called ‘spooky;’ it seems eerie that the act of measuring one particle could instantly influence the other one.' [emphasis mine]

My question is: Does turning a polarizer that measures one photon, actually affect or change the other distant entangled photon?

Yes, if you believe the Bohm interpretation. But the effect averages out to noise in the ensemble average for local measurements.

I am aware that you cannot send a message with an EPR setup. I have now read several books on quantum optics. And I observe that they either equivocate, or agree with Zeilinger.

That's because different interpretations give different answers - but it's all moot until one can test the theory by going beyond it with signal nonlocality.

But some prominent physicists say that turning the polarizer at A does not affect the measurement at B.
My question is about causality. What's your opinion please?

Causality is up for grabs now that Yakir Aharonov's theory got a medal from Obama in the White House. Even though Yakir's theory has back-from-the-future destiny influence it is still within the confines of signal locality therefore not able to explain our ordinary consciousness as well as remote viewing - in my opinion.

Many thanks for your help.
Russell