Time doesn’t necessarily run in a discreet, successive, phase.  Events or rather moments can be linked in both local and non-local ways.  As an example, let’s say, a person, sitting with their spouse, was thinking about what a friend had said three weeks earlier.  During his silent reflection, the spouse asked if he had heard from that friend.  There was no connection between the two events – one was internal and the other explicate.  Neither had they been discussing this person earlier.  The two events resonated within the person – at least enough for him take note or think it odd of their simultaneous occurrence in external and internal form.  We will call that synchronistic or a-causal event number one.

Later in the evening, the same person is about to retire when the phone rings and it is that actual friend from three weeks back who is on the phone.  Now there is a connection between this event and the one where the question was “have you heard from your friend”.  That is a-causal event number two.

The next morning, our person is checking e-mail when a neighbor stops in for an online chat and asks for advice.  It turns out that a possible answer is the one he heard from his friend three weeks earlier.  This becomes our non-local, a-causal event number three.

The individual then considers the question and, with little rationality for other possible answers, provides the one given to him by his friend three weeks earlier.  The reasoning is that the events were a-causal or unusual and held great meaning for the individual to whom they occurred.  It seemed to this individual that the right answer for the person was the one supported by the a-causal events.

In such a situation, the will to inform and interact three weeks earlier was in some way connected, in a super-positional, non-local and a-causal way, with the three latter non-local events where information and meaning were communicated across a network to the consciousness of a third party, twice removed.  This third party might be interacting with other non-local “a-causally entangled” events or information on the subject or meaning at hand, either from the present, the past, or maybe even the future that informs their will to interact with reality, collapsing the wave function at each super-positional moment.

The system described here would be nonlocal and while a-causal it is not anti-causal.  It suggests a superposition of states that exist in a non-local fashion and manifest a particular outcome through a state of collective willful interaction and meaning.  If Crick’s hypothesis is correct then such collective willful interaction and meaning would not exist and there would not be a state vector collapse of such a-causal and non-local events.  There is no room for a consciousness, let alone a collective consciousness, in Crick’s view.

Related to the area of nonlocality and quantum entanglement, work is also being done in the area of quantum game theory.  Here we find results in anomalously high success rates in coordination games between separated players.  These high success rates would seem to require communication between the players; however, the game is set up such that during the game, this is physically impossible.  These currently do not allow for anti-causality or a reversal of communication in time but do suggest super-positional, non-local states of mind.

There are theoretical instances of string theory that allow for the communication of information backward in time.  If the communication of information that is backwards in time could be proven then this too might impact Crick’s astonishing hypothesis.

This entry is not arguing for backward-in-time communication.  One thing is established, that mind, volition and meaning can be an a-causal system of simultaneous, non-local events supported by fundamental theories in quantum mechanics and certain other theories and interpretations of Heisenberg’s uncertainty principal.  These include Schrödinger’s equation, Bell’s Theorem and the de Broglie–Bohm theory that are explicitly non-local.

What’s being proposed is that time doesn’t necessarily run in a discreet, successive, phase.  Events or rather moments and meaning can be linked in both local and non-local ways.  Also, according to the theory of relativity, a sharp distinction cannot be maintained between space and time.  The only manifestations of differences are at velocities that are small compared to the velocity of light and instantaneous connectivity.

The implication of quantum theory then is that elements separated in space are related projections of a higher order, related non-locally.  It follows that moments and meaning, likewise separated in time are projections of these non-local, a-causal, and higher orders.