Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This is a pre-registration, not a claim of experimental success. It states in advance one quantitative prediction that differs from standard quantum optics, one protocol to test it, and one set of falsification criteria. Claim: A causal loop with H^1_causal != 0 adds an extra erasure factor gamma_causal(L), even when the which-way marker W is held fixed. Setup: Mach-Zehnder interferometer, heralded single photons at 810 nm, which-way marker overlap |<W0|W1>| = 0.60, one arm through a fiber delay loop of length L. Standard prediction (Englert 1996):V_standard = 0.600, D = 0.800, D^2 + V^2 = 1.000, flat in L. Tseglin prediction:gamma_causal(L) = 0.30 * (1 - exp(-L / 2.0 m))V_Tseglin(L) = 0.600 * (1 - gamma_causal(L)) Headline number at L = 3.0 m:Standard: V = 0.600 +/- 0.010Tseglin: V = 0.460 +/- 0.010Difference: Delta V = 0.140 Vindicated if: V(3.0 m) = 0.460 +/- 0.030 and V(L) follows the predicted curve within +/- 0.03.Falsified if: V(3.0 m) = 0.600 +/- 0.030 and V is flat in L within +/- 0.02.Inconclusive if: D drifts, control drifts, or error bars exceed 0.03. No experimental data are reported herein.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Robert Aar Tseglin (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: