1. Retrocausation implies Decline Dick J Bierman University of Amsterdam Presented at ‘the decline effect’, Oct. 19-21, Santa Barbara

2. The Argument 1. Examples of across experiment declines in anomaly research –No regression to the mean –Increasing quality? 2. Models: – Sensory metaphor is inadequate – All Anomalous effects are ‘retrocausal’ 2. Paradoxes are 'forbidden' in Nature Cumulative Effect size is limited to prevent paradoxes 3. MainStream decline = a.o. experimenter psi effect?

3. No initial false positive followed by a random distribution of results around true effect size after initial measurement

4. Dice Experiments Gradual decline to effect size of 0. Quality improvement? 0

5. Quality analyses (not actual data) Quality 1/ p NS Short reports: so Inadequate quality assesment True quality More significant studies have better quality So quality explanation cannot be ruled out but...

6. However rebound? Ganzfeld Quality increases Quality decreases????

7. Not only 'precognition' but all anomalous phenomena can and must be modeled as ‘retrocausal’ Traditional Perceptional/informational models – Extra SENSORY perception 3 rd EYE, 6 th SENSE Subject is supposed to 'scan' all environment (all space and time) to select relevant information, in this case the target. Requires near infinite amount of processing capacity.

8. Limit 'information' to future feedback Note that in Ganzfeld (apparent real time) telepathy research feedback is given. Anomalous correlations only with own FUTURE brain state – Feedback is required Effect decreases with distance in time – Delayed feedback gives smaller effect size

9. Physics Contrary to Newtonian belief physics is quite liberal in accepting 'retrocausality' – The advanced solution of EM theory (time- symmetry) Any retrocausal theory has to deal with paradoxes.

10. Very recent Can a Future Choice Affect a Past Measurement's Outcome? – Yakir Aharonov, Eliahu Cohen, Doron Grossman, Avshalom C. Elitzur » (last revised 18 Sep 2012 (this version, v5)) – An EPR experiment is studied where each particle undergoes a few weak measurements of different spin-orientations, whose outcomes are individually recorded…… yet iv) The weak measurements' outcome agrees with those of the strong ones. The only reasonable resolution seems to be …namely that the weak measurement's outcomes anticipate the experimenter's future choice, even before the experimenter themselves knows what their choice is going to be. Causal loops are avoided by this anticipation remaining encrypted until the final outcomes enable to decipher it.

11. What about paradoxes ●Prediction of candle induced fire and responding with removal of candles is formally equivalent with grandfather paradox Novikov consistency principle: –Time-travel is posssible but not in a way that potentially paradoxes might be created. Schmidt: Can effects precede their cause? –Foundations of Physics, 1978 Yes but Fooling Nature i.e. Paradox creation) results in decrease of effect. DECLINE!!!!! Nick Herbert anecdote.

12. DECLINE If signal/noise ratio is improved then perfect predictions become more probable and hence paradox creation might be possible. –Replication increases signal/noise ratio –Increasing sample size idem

13. Main stream decline Experimenter psi? Assume that any effect has two contributions: –Normal causal relation + –Anomalous experimenter (FB driven) psi effect Then: –The experimenter-psi contribution will decline. Experimenter psi is strongest in field of psi research due to self selection.

14. Conclusion Declines in experimental psi research are intrinsic. Rebound may occur if cumulative effect is below some value. - try parallel replication rather tan sequential - try only experimental paradigms that exclude potential use of the anomalous correlations.

15. How to proceed in psi research Parallel replications – No sequential replication of parallel reps

16. Thank you for your attention

17. Very recent Can a Future Choice Affect a Past Measurement's Outcome? – Yakir Aharonov, Eliahu Cohen, Doron Grossman, Avshalom C. Elitzur » (last revised 18 Sep 2012 (this version, v5)) – An EPR experiment is studied where each particle undergoes a few weak measurements of different spin-orientations, whose outcomes are individually recorded…… yet iv) The weak measurements' outcome agrees with those of the strong ones. The only reasonable resolution seems to be …namely that the weak measurement's outcomes anticipate the experimenter's future choice, even before the experimenter themselves knows what their choice is going to be. Causal loops are avoided by this anticipation remaining encrypted until the final outcomes enable to decipher it.