Entanglement Signals, Back From The Future Dark Energy

I suppose this may be considered a rear-guard action leaving no stone unturned in the general belief in no-entanglement signaling in the sense of papers of Adrian Kent even though papers by Antony Valentini suggest otherwise.
Of course, orthodox micro-quantum theory does not allow stand-alone entanglement signals no one denies that. The issue is whether orthodox quantum theory is the final complete theory of reality. Einstein did not think so.
General quantum theory would be to orthodox quantum theory the way general relativity is to special relativity.
Experiments by Libet, Radin, Bierman, Bem and others seem to provide evidence for entanglement signaling in mental activity. Roger Penrose discusses early experiments by Libet in his books.
The discovery of dark energy accelerating the universe’s expansion is evidence for retro-causality when combined with the t’Hooft-Susskind hologram conjecture. The observer-dependent cosmological future de Sitter event horizon is the dominant hologram screen and the observed dark energy density hc/Lp^2A is the redshifted Hawking-Unruh advanced Wheeler-Feynman black body radiation hc/Lp^4 from our future horizon. A = area-entropy asymptote of our future horizon.

       Adapted from Tamara Davis PhD Fig 1.1c
Yakir Aharonov’s post-selected destiny state vector weak measurement quantum theory though not having stand-alone entanglement signaling is easily extended to include it.
John Cramer has proposed an experiment to test for Wheeler-Feynman “transactional" back from the future influences.
Henry Stapp published a paper in Phys Rev A on an extended retro-causal quantum theory that explained real data by Helmut Schmidt. The editors figuratively burnt Henry at the stake. See MIT physics professor David Kaiser’s book “How the Hippies Saved Physics” for the details.
Jorge Berger has shown how Glauber macro-quantum coherent state Landau-Ginzburg emergent Higgs-Goldstone order parameters have nonlinear non-unitary local dynamics violating the linear unitarity nonlocal entanglement dynamics of micro-quantum theory. The Vitiello-Freeman brain dynamics is an example of what Berger is talking about. Indeed, P.W. Anderson’s emergent “More is different” must be taken more seriously.
Einstein’s gravity as curvature itself in the tetrad/spin-connection Cartan formalism seems to be a spontaneous broken emergent c-number Higgs-Goldstone post-inflation “vacuum superconductor” field with residual local de-Sitter conformal gauge group symmetry.
The four LIF tetrad 1-forms e^I are diagonal elements of a 4x4 M-Matrix made from eight post-inflation Goldstone phase 0-forms and their exterior derivatives. The six spin-connection 1-forms w^I^J are the antisymmetrized off-diagonal elements of the same M-Matrix.
ds^2 = e^I(LIF)eI(LIF) = guv(LNIF)e^u(LNIF)e^v(LNIF)   (EEP)
R^I^J(curvature) = Dw^I^J = dw^I^J + w^IK/w^K^J
Einstein-Hilbert Action Density = {IJKL}R^I^J/e^K/e^L  (zero torsion 1916 limit)
Tony Valentini has shown that entanglement signals violate the Born probability interpretation for Von Neumann strong measurements that is merely a sub-quantal equilibrium contingency in Bohm’s ontological quantum theory. The distinguishable non-orthgonality of the Glauber states with their ODLRO emergent condensates provide a clear violation of of the Born rule. Of course, the Born rule can be ad-hoc forced on the Glauber states by renormalization, but it is an empirical issue whether or not Nature’s actual states choose to be always normalized to unity.
The basic formal issue is elementary dear Watson.
Consider the entangled 2-qubit pair Bell state for Alice and Bob
|A,B) = (1/2)^1/2[|A0)|B0) + |A1)|B1)]
The Born rule says that in strong Von-Neuman measurements (in contrast to Aharonov’s counter-intuitive history-destiny weak measurements) that there is probability 1/2 for Alice to locally measure “0” no matter what Bob does. For now assume that Alice and Bob are spacelike separated when their irreversibly amplified strong measurements are actually made. However, the hidden assumption here is that Bob’s states are “orthogonal” (B0|B1) = 0, which is always the case in INCOHERENT RANDOM micro-quantum theory for strong measurements of the eigenfunctions Hermitian observables with real eigenvalues - not so for the emergent spontaneous broken ground state symmetry COHERENT NON-RANDOM Glauber states that are eigenfunctions of the non-Hermitian field harmonic oscillator second quantized creation and annihilation ladder operators with complex eigenvalues of the amplitude and phase well known to radio and radar technicians.
The formal rule for strong measurements uses the density matrix Dirac outer-product ket-bra projection operator formalism.
The complete zero entropy pure pair state density matrix for Alice and Bob is |A,B)(A,B|
The rule for the response for Alice to measure eigenvalue “0” is to trace over both Bob's base states in the product of |A0)(A0|
with |A,B)(A,B|
Alice’s LOCAL Signal Strength (0) = TraceBob{|A0)(A0||A,B)(A,B|)}
In general this is equal to (1/2)[1 + (B0|B1)|^2]
In orthodox micro-QM |(B0|B1)|^2 = 0 and we get the no-entanglement signal result of Henry Stapp, Adrian Kent et-al.
However, in macro-QM with Glauber states this is not so. We can have approximately cloned laser amplified Glauber states |B0) & |B1) that are OVER-COMPLETE DISTINGUISHABLY NON-ORTHOGONAL.
Now even in this case since Alice’s response for both 0 and 1 are equal we can ad-hoc force the Born interpretation to get 1/2. As I said this is an empirical issue whether our real world is put into that Procrustean Bed of Nails. The experiments of Daryl Bem at Cornell and others suggest otherwise.
to be continued.