Physicists Say We Can Send Messages to the Past!
42sThe headline-grabbing claim instantly hooks viewers, and the promise of a real scientific paper makes it shareable.
▶ Play Clip"Title is technically accurate but misleading; the video clarifies it's theoretical and not practical."
This video discusses a theoretical physics paper published in PRL that suggests a new method for sending messages into the past using quantum mechanics. The presenter explains the concept, its limitations, and why it might not be as revolutionary as headlines suggest.
Headlines claim physicists have figured out a new way to send messages into the past, based on a paper in PRL.
The study is theoretical and does not involve DeLoreans or black holes; it requires quantum physics.
Quantum physics has an uneasy relation with causality because particles can do multiple things at once, and there's no objective way to tell what happens at the same time, making causality uncertain.
The paper from MIT involves a receiver device built at some time, a special quantum state prepared, and a sender who measures the state to inject information into the past.
The new paper shows that noise in the communication channel is less of a problem for sending messages into the past than into the future.
They use postselection, meaning after measuring the quantum state, they only look at specific outcomes, postulating a universe with only one outcome.
The key point is that you can't tell apart a message from the future from a prediction; both are indistinguishable.
In reality, we can't predict quantum outcomes, and postselection isn't enforceable, so the device works like posting many predictions and deleting all but the correct one.
The presenter rates the paper 8 out of 10 on the bullshit meter, noting the maths works but the interpretation is questionable.
The real story is that physicists are rethinking temporal relations, which are more complicated than simple cause-effect.
The video concludes that while the paper is mathematically sound, its interpretation is questionable, and the real significance lies in physicists rethinking causality and temporal relations.
What is the main claim of the paper discussed?
It suggests a new way to send messages into the past using quantum mechanics.
What is postselection in quantum physics?
After measuring a quantum state, only specific outcomes are considered, postulating a universe with only one outcome.
02:32
Why can't we distinguish a message from the future from a prediction?
Because both produce the same outcome, and there's no way to tell them apart.
03:00
What is the presenter's rating on the bullshit meter?
8 out of 10.
04:32
What is the real story according to the presenter?
Physicists are rethinking temporal relations, which are more complicated than simple cause-effect.
04:45
Quantum Causality
Explains the fundamental uncertainty of causality in quantum mechanics.
00:42Noise Asymmetry
Noise is less problematic for past messaging than future, a counterintuitive finding.
02:01Prediction vs. Time Message
Highlights the philosophical indistinguishability between prediction and time messaging.
03:00Bullshit Meter Rating
Provides a critical evaluation of the paper's credibility.
04:32[00:00] Sending messages into the past just got easier. Or, as the headlines put it “We have figured out a new way to send messages into the past” and “Physicists Say It’s Possible to Send
[00:12] Messages Backward in Time”. Even more amazing, these headlines are based on a paper published in PRL, the top journal in the field. As you’ve guessed correctly, no one’s yet figured out how to actually send messages into the past, this is a theoretical
[00:29] study. But it’s quite interesting indeed, and no it does not involve a DeLorean, a time fairy, or a black hole behind a bookshelf. It just requires a little bit of quantum physics. Let’s have a look.
[00:42] Quantum physics has an uneasy relation with causality. This is because once you accept that particles can do multiple things at the same time, and factor in that Einstein tells us there is no objective way to tell what happens at
[00:57] the same time, then quantum mechanics also tells you that generally you can’t tell what happened in which order. Causality becomes as uncertain as the rest of quantum physics. And of course the first question you might have is: can I make money with it? Who wouldn’t want
[01:14] to tell their younger self to buy Nvidia stocks without having to grow a wormhole in the basement! The new paper is a continuation of an earlier work. It comes from an MIT group and the scenario
[01:27] they look at is loosely speaking this. You have a receiver device that you have built at some time and that is ready to receive messages from the future. Before you build the device, you can’t get any messages. Then you have a special quantum state that you prepare
[01:44] and you let it do its quantum thing. And once the quantum state has done its thing, there is a sender who measures the quantum state and that, so the idea injects information in the message receiver in the past. In the new paper they show that this still works
[02:01] if there is noise in this communication channel. Amazingly enough, if you want to send messages into the past, the noise is less of a problem than if you want to send it into the future.
[02:13] referring to a future work from 1985 co-authored by E L Brown and M McFly. Ok, but leaving aside the noise, just what do they say we must do to send messages into the past?
[02:32] They are using what is called “postselection”. This basically means that after you have done the measurement of the quantum state, you only look at specific outcomes. You see, in quantum physics we cannot normally predict the outcome of the
[02:48] experiment. But they postulate that we basically live in a universe with only one outcome. And then the message that you get in the past is… the outcome which will happen.
[03:00] Ok, but wait, how is this not just making a prediction? Well, to me this is the key point of the paper: in general you can’t tell these two things apart. Forget the quantum stuff for
[03:14] a moment, imagine that you just sit there with your device that can receive messages from the future… or so you think. It has a screen and noise flickers on the screen most of the time, then suddenly it says “BUY NVIDIA”. You go buy Nvidia and a year later you’re rich.
[03:29] But did you get a message from the future or is your machine just good at predicting the stock market? There is no way to tell these two things apart. I don’t know about you, but if I had such a device I wouldn’t care. Physicists could
[03:43] discuss until the end of time whether it really does receive messages from the future or whether it’s just crazy good at making predictions. I'll be sitting at the pool, cheers. That said, in today’s reality we can’t predict the outcome of quantum
[03:59] measurements and post-selection isn’t something you can magically enforce on our universe. This means that for practical purposes their device works more like this: Suppose I set up an X-twitter account and post a hundred thousand messages predicting the next
[04:17] major LA earthquake for any possible day until 2100. Then, once it happens, I delete all messages but one, celebrate the correct prediction and claim that it was given to me by a time
[04:32] traveller. Works on X, doesn’t work in reality. So I have to give this paper a 8 out of 10 on the bullshit meter. The maths works out, but their interpretation is highly questionable. That said,
[04:45] the real story here isn’t that physicists have invented a working telephone to yesterday. The story is that physicists are slowly rethinking temporal relations which I
[04:57] think are much more complicated than the simple cause-effect idea that we’re used to. I promise I’ll have a word with my past self about questionable hairstyle choices.
[05:11] I am very protective of my privacy, but it's become incredibly difficult online when there are a dozen companies tracking you each time you open a website. That's why I'm signed up
[05:23] to Incogni. Incogni is a service that keeps your personal data out of the hands of data brokers. These are companies which collect data about you each time you visit a website and when you fill
[05:35] in information. Then they sell this information off. You can request that they remove your data, but this is incredibly time-consuming. Incogni automates this process. It's very simple. You
[05:48] sign up and they'll contact the big sinners, request that your personal details be removed. They also now have a new custom removal feature where you can submit specific websites. If you
[06:01] use my code SABINE or the custom link in the info below, you'll get 60% off of Incogni, which isn't expensive in the first place. That's an amazing deal. So,
[06:13] go and check this out. Thanks for watching. See you tomorrow.
⚡ Saved you 0h 06m reading this? Transcribe any YouTube video for free — no signup needed.