The point is whether we can use quantum error correction to bias the probabilities on one end, before the decoherence happens.
Modern quantum error correction techniques are dramatically improving:
Decoherence suppression: Extending coherence times of qubits.
Fault-tolerant quantum computing: Reducing errors in quantum state evolution.
Quantum memory storage: Holding quantum states stable for long durations.
So if decoherence is controllable, and if randomness is epistemic (not ontological), then this suggests we can gradually influence quantum measurement probabilities.
Look, here's what we can already do today:
Extend entanglement coherence times (already happening).
Control quantum noise with precision (e.g., superconducting qubits).
Perform weak measurements without full collapse (experimental quantum optics).
I agree that directly biasing entangled measurements nonlocally has not yet demonstrated today, but it could be in the near future, which is what I am predicting can unleash this FTL communication possibility!
Quantum error correction is already proving that decoherence isn’t truly random—it can be controlled. The interaction-free measurement paradox suggests that it’s possible to extract information without collapsing a wavefunction. Bohmian Mechanics & PWT are underexplored experimentally, and this would be a direct way to test them.