>>16706880

>Or at least retrocausality?

You mean because that could produce possible paradox, requiring a rigid "predetermined" model to exclude these ... well, not exactly. The understanding of dimensionality and causality in such a hypothetical effect might be misleading. Seeing it more by flow dynamics would make more sense. There is an inertia to the general flow direction, so paradox cases of causality might just be incapable of overcoming this. How is this not rigid you might ask? It would not assume isolated causalities in such particular cases, rather the totality of causality. Which a (virtually) isolated node of determination could bend to whatevs degree, yet not break entirely. Free will within degrees of freedom.