Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!rutgers!sri-spam!sri-unix!hplabs!pyramid!ctnews!gypsy!andrew!KFL@MX.LCS.MIT.EDU
From: KFL@MX.LCS.MIT.EDU
Newsgroups: sci.physics
Subject: Reverse causality
Message-ID: <240@sri-arpa.ARPA>
Date: Thu, 6-Nov-86 23:39:15 EST
Article-I.D.: sri-arpa.240
Posted: Thu Nov  6 23:39:15 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 8-Nov-86 05:34:14 EST
Lines: 18

From:  "Keith F. Lynch" <KFL@MX.LCS.MIT.EDU>

    From: hplabs!sdcrdcf!psivax!nrcvax!nrc-ut!uplherc!utah-gr!pwa-b!mmintl!franka@UCB-Vax.arpa (Frank Adams)

    ...
    I doubt that it is possible to design an experiment whose results could
    require reverse causality for their explanation.

  I don't think there is any reverse causality, and if there is, I
think it is much more likely to be discovered by peering at an
oscillosope in a high energy physics lab than by peering at cards with
mystical symbols on them by candlelight, HOWEVER, I think experiments
CAN and HAVE been designed which would require reverse causality to
explain a possible outcome of.  Saying that no such experiment is
possible is saying that belief in forward-only causality is non-
scientific.  All scientific beliefs are in principle falsifiable by
experiment.
								...Keith