Counterfactual computation is a thing. I don’t know the requirements that well but it would suggest that the information could be tortured out under some circumstances.
It is one way to think how to get around Bell limits. It is not a local hidden variable if your tiebreaker data lies in a parralel timeline.
In this scenario one can think of being in a “world” C where you have one photon. Then if C is only whatever exists in the multiverse the mirror D splits it. But if the detector E never receives anything you can deduce that the photon in the “parallel timeline” B is a entity that you need to keep track off. In this scenario we know to keep track of B because we knew that A existed justifying keeping track of C and B. Decoherence makes a bit hard to think about, any memory-former that interacts with only C can’t see B and any memory-former that interacts with both can’t be sure whether C or B is the case.
Counterfactual computation is a thing. I don’t know the requirements that well but it would suggest that the information could be tortured out under some circumstances.
It is one way to think how to get around Bell limits. It is not a local hidden variable if your tiebreaker data lies in a parralel timeline.
In this scenario one can think of being in a “world” C where you have one photon. Then if C is only whatever exists in the multiverse the mirror D splits it. But if the detector E never receives anything you can deduce that the photon in the “parallel timeline” B is a entity that you need to keep track off. In this scenario we know to keep track of B because we knew that A existed justifying keeping track of C and B. Decoherence makes a bit hard to think about, any memory-former that interacts with only C can’t see B and any memory-former that interacts with both can’t be sure whether C or B is the case.