On some frequent but controversial statements concerning the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen correlations

Quite often the compatibility of the EPR correlations with the relativity theory has been questioned; it has been stated that the first in time of two correlated measurements instantaneously collapses the other subsystem; it has been suggested that a causal asymmetry is built into the Feynman propagator. However, the EPR transition amplitude, as derived from the S matrix, is Lorentz andCPT invariant; the correlation formula is symmetric in the two measurements irrespective of their time ordering, so that the link of the correlations is the Feynman zigzag, and that causality isCPT invariant at the microlevel; finally, although the Feynman propagator has theP andCT symmetries, no causal asymmetry follows from that. As for Stapp's views concerning process and becoming, and his Whiteheadean concept of an advancing front, I object that they belong to factlike macrophysics, and are refuted at the microlevel by the EPR phenomenology, which displays direct Fokker-like space-time connections. The reason for this is a radical one. The very blending of a space-time picture and of a probability calculus is a paradox. The only adequate paradigm is one denying objectivity to space-time—but this, of course, is also required by the complementary of the x and the k pictures, which only look compatible at the macrolevel. Therefore, the classical objectivity must yield in favor of intersubjectivity. Only the macroscopic preparing and measuring devices have factlike objectivity; the transition of the quantal system takes place beyond both thex and thek 4-spaces. Then, the intrinsic symmetries between retarded and advanced waves, and statistical prediction and retrodiction, entails that the future has no less (but no more) existence than the past. It is the future that is significant in creative process, the elementary forms of which should be termed precognition or psychokinesis—respectively symmetric to the factlike taboos that we can neither know into the future nor act into the past. It is gratifying that Robert Jahn, at the Engineering School of Princeton University, is conducting (after others) conclusive experiments demonstrating low level psychokinesis—a phenomenon implied by the very symmetry of the negentropy-information transition. So, what pierces the veil of maya is the (rare) occurrence of paranormal phenomena. The essential severance between act and potentia is not a spacelike advancing front, but the out of and the into factlike space-time. Finally, I do not feel that an adequate understanding of the EPR phenomenology requires going beyond the present status of relativistic quantum mechanics. Rather, I believe that the potentialities of this formalism have not yet been fully exploited.