# Newcomb's Paradox

**URL:** <https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/newcombs-paradox/298>\
**Category:** Logic & Philosophy of Mathematics\
**Created:** [March 11, 2026, 3:09am UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/newcombs-paradox/298 "2026-03-11T03:09:32Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 904

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Benkei](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/b5ac83/32.png) [@Benkei](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/u/Benkei)\
**Post date:** [June 12, 2026, 10:07am UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/newcombs-paradox/298/904 "2026-06-12T10:07:58Z")

</div>

> [@Using code for Newcomb's problem](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/using-code-for-newcombs-problem/1183/38):
>
> This makes no sense at all. It sounds like you expect ‘entanglement’ can be used to deliberately cause some outcome. It can’t. That would be FTL message sending, which is forbidden.

How is that FTL messaging? You verifying the state of the box is still at sublight speeds. What am I missing? I’m imagining it as follows:

The quantum entanglement mind reading machine causes, at a high level of accuracy, one of a pair of particles to collapse into 1/2 up spin if you choose 1B. It’s entangled particle is in the box and according to current theory instantaneously collapses in 1/2 down spin (if I understand it correctly). This effect is regardless of distance. The rule is that if you measure down spin on the particle in the box, you get 1,000,000.

You open the box, measure it, get 1,000,000. No FTL involved I think?

---

_[View the full topic](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/newcombs-paradox/298)._