Our panel of 91 professional philosophers has responded to

87
 questions about 
Physics
31
 questions about 
Space
123
 questions about 
Profession
132
 questions about 
Love
217
 questions about 
Value
32
 questions about 
Sport
27
 questions about 
Gender
54
 questions about 
Medicine
386
 questions about 
Religion
38
 questions about 
Race
96
 questions about 
Time
110
 questions about 
Biology
80
 questions about 
Death
58
 questions about 
Punishment
207
 questions about 
Science
79
 questions about 
Identity
570
 questions about 
Philosophy
104
 questions about 
Art
359
 questions about 
Logic
2
 questions about 
Culture
107
 questions about 
Animals
74
 questions about 
Beauty
34
 questions about 
Music
24
 questions about 
Suicide
75
 questions about 
Perception
66
 questions about 
Truth
58
 questions about 
Abortion
281
 questions about 
Mind
5
 questions about 
Euthanasia
2
 questions about 
Action
68
 questions about 
Happiness
216
 questions about 
Education
36
 questions about 
Literature
165
 questions about 
Freedom
69
 questions about 
Business
148
 questions about 
Existence
282
 questions about 
Language
77
 questions about 
Emotion
67
 questions about 
Feminism
1261
 questions about 
Ethics
115
 questions about 
Children
50
 questions about 
War
23
 questions about 
History
4
 questions about 
Economics
279
 questions about 
Knowledge
43
 questions about 
Color
241
 questions about 
Justice
153
 questions about 
Sex
87
 questions about 
Law

Question of the Day

There are interpretations of quantum mechanics that make related claims. There's the transactional interpretation, proposed by John Cramer and developed more recently by Ruth Kastner. It holds that quantum events such as measurement results occur when there is a "handshake" between an advanced wave, traveling from future to past, and a retarded wave, traveling from past to future. The so-called two-state vector formalism, pursued in recent years by Yakir Aharanov and Lev Vaidman, is in some ways similar. Huw Price has long argued that if we allow for backward causation, we can avoid having to posit faster-than-light action at a distance. Some people have argued that in certain cases, quantum teleportation involves information moving from future to past.

But all of this is controversial and it would be hard to argue that a consistent understanding of quantum mechanics requires backward causation. To which we should add: these interpretations do not claim that quantum mechanics can exploit any such backward causation to allow someone in the future to send messages to us in the present. In other words, if there's information from the future that impinges on quantum events in the present, it's not "available" in the sense of being something we can extract and make use of.