I must admit that I've never actually seen a detailed report on this experiment, although naturally one hears anecdotal tales. I'd love it if you could provide me with a link that actually lists the study date and the names of the experimenters. John Wheeler initially proposed the experiment, but I don't know who actually carried it out.
I do know that the essential "time travel" aspect of it is valid...it's the same sort of effect as with the "entangled" particle pairs of the EPR experiment, where you can set the properties of one particle and instantly--faster than lightspeed, faster than anything--set the properties of the other.
However, it seems unlikely that the "consciousness controls all" aspect is quite as strong as suggested. Consider: if you simply decide not to look at the computer data after you've stored it, then you've essentially created the same situation as if the computer auto-erases the data. So in that case the wave/dot effect should depend on your personal whim--and if you erase the data after you've seen a dot, then you've created a paradox, no? I think some aspects of this have been exaggerated in the telling.
Most of what I've read suggests that the act of "measurement" really takes place in the apparatus rather than in your mind. That is, events that don't involve consciousness at all can still affect wave functions in the same way as a "measurement" does.
Another reason I'd doubt this is that in every other time travel/instantaneous travel QM trick found so far, there are always "gimmicks" attached so that you can't violate relativity and transfer information faster than light. For instance: as described above you can set the properties of a distant particle by messing with a nearby one--BUT the way in which you set the properties for both returns a random result. It's like you've got a pair of magic dice, and they always turn up on the same number, so you can put one on Pluto and instantly know what number it has from looking at your own--but the number you throw in the first place is random, so you can't use it to send information.
On the other hand, if this experimental result actually happened it would definitely allow you to send info from the future--all you have to do is see if the film pattern is a wave or a dot to know if you're gonna ever look at the data. And that would be really big news. :-)
One minor indication that whoever produced this story wasn't entirely reliable: A single electron does *not* produce a wave pattern on the film. Ever. It produces a dot. But when both slits are open, its *probability* of hitting any given point is a wave-shaped function...so when you fire a million electrons through the slits one after another, their individual dots pile up to form a wave distribution. Whereas if you close one slit, the electron dots simply pile up at one point to form a big bright dot.
--SiliconDream, using more and more quotes and asterisks in every post
