A quasi-Moorean argument for time travel

[fosio]

In 2008, building upon earlier results, it was demonstrated that the brain has already “decided” to raise one hand or the other about 10 seconds before the person reports having consciously decided to do so. Some have used this demonstration to argue that free will is an illusion, others to suppose that the free will resides in the unconscious activity of the brain (which is a no starter since free will is about conscious decision making, if the sub and unconciousness were free will then we’d all be sinning in our dreams).

I take a different tack. I think it is clear from our subjective experience that we decide to raise one hand or the other when we consciously make that decision. How then do I explain the demonstration that the brain has already “decided” 10 seconds prior to any awareness on my part? Time travel. The possibility that is overlooked is that maybe my conscious decision (i.e. the conscious decision of my brain) causes ripple effects BACKWARD through time, with particles/waves that travel backward through time. Physics has already postulated that particles that travel fast than the speed of light (or in an alternate conception, particles that don’t travel faster than light but that travel backward through time) exist – they are known as tachyons. Maybe tachyons or something exotic like tachyons is operative in our brain and explains how decisions are “seen” in the brain 10 seconds before they occur.

Stephen Hawking postulated once that the arrow of time for the whole universe would reverse one day so these kinds of exotic time properties are not just science fiction. The hypothesis that tachyon-like waves/particles are responsible for the 10 second pre-viewing of decision making may seem far fetched but IMO what is even more far fetched is the idea that my conscious experience of decision making is not valid. So, by a quasi-Moorean move, I elect to accept time traveling neural processes over the alternatives.

 

[Areopagite]

In 2008, building upon earlier results, it was demonstrated that the brain has already “decided” to raise one hand or the other about 10 seconds before the person reports having consciously decided to do so. Some have used this demonstration to argue that free will is an illusion, others to suppose that the free will resides in the unconscious activity of the brain (which is a no starter since free will is about conscious decision making, if the sub and unconciousness were free will then we’d all be sinning in our dreams).

I take a different tack. I think it is clear from our subjective experience that we decide to raise one hand or the other when we consciously make that decision. How then do I explain the demonstration that the brain has already “decided” 10 seconds prior to any awareness on my part? Time travel. The possibility that is overlooked is that maybe my conscious decision (i.e. the conscious decision of my brain) causes ripple effects BACKWARD through time, with particles/waves that travel backward through time. Physics has already postulated that particles that travel fast than the speed of light (or in an alternate conception, particles that don’t travel faster than light but that travel backward through time) exist – they are known as tachyons. Maybe tachyons or something exotic like tachyons is operative in our brain and explains how decisions are “seen” in the brain 10 seconds before they occur.

Stephen Hawking postulated once that the arrow of time for the whole universe would reverse one day so these kinds of exotic time properties are not just science fiction. The hypothesis that tachyon-like waves/particles are responsible for the 10 second pre-viewing of decision making may seem far fetched but IMO what is even more far fetched is the idea that my conscious experience of decision making is not valid. So, by a quasi-Moorean move, I elect to accept time traveling neural processes over the alternatives.

Interesting question. A couple possibilities (assuming that free will is real):

• The Experimentation and/or Reasoning from the experimental data is dubious for a million reasons. Constantly, scientists have come forward after a multiple experiments and concluded something as “definite” but then a few years later … it’s all wrong. One recent example, reading the current health magazine and whatnot, is that fat is really not that bad for you. For years the scientists had “proven” that fat makes you fat, but really it was other **** people were eating that threw their bodies into an unnatural state that caused obesity. (I might be wrong about this … well, that’s what the health magazines seem to be saying). Scientists sometimes jump to conclusions after insufficient experimentation and analysis of the data, and later on, take it all back. Happens constantly, unfortunately.
• Another possibility is that one may consciously choose to do something and then 10 seconds later realize that they chose it. This may seem to fly in the face of the necessary conditions for a conscious free choice … for it is true that one must be conscious of themselves in order to choose something freely. Yet, I think that the cognitive/conscious experience of choosing something versus the realization of having chosen something are two different things. And there might be some natural hesitation of interpreting what you actually resolved to do in a particular situation. That’s one possibility.
• Another one is that the people being experimented on might be following their physical instincts, which the free will usually does (unfortunately … sometimes). And thus what is being detected is the instinct, which the person then assents to with his will 10 seconds later … every time at least with most people. And of course going with your instincts (and there are other words for this … some of which might be distinguished from “instincts” technically … simply like physical desire or something), it’s not all bad to go with your instincts usually. Sometimes, however, your body can desire something bad, in which case you will should refuse. But in most cases (though not all), I think, your will goes along with your body’s inclinations (for better of for worse).
• Another possibility, which I guess is worth mentioning is that there are some liberal modernist wack-jobs running these experiments and are just making **** up to try to destroy religion or something. I had to mention that of course. But I don’t think that’s necessary the case. I could be wrong.
• The other possibility is that your tachyon theory is right. Personally, I don’t think so. That’s because I hate time-travel. After sci-fi movie after sci-fi movie, and long conversations, and careful contemplation … time-travel is just a bunch of garbage. It doesn’t work. (Time-travel specifically the going back into the past … going into the future isn’t impossible obviously). One possible disproof for your theory is that … you have a guy hooked up to the brain monitor thing … you see the readings indicating he is about to choose something … and then you blow his brains out with a close-range gunshot (or at least club him unconscious). Assuming that such tachyons from free will have caused that reading ten second before the free will decision is actually made, you have disrupted the actual decisions by killing the person … and yet the 10-second time-traveling indicator is still there … but if you killed the person before he made the decision, then those readings shouldn’t have been there in the first place, in which case you never would have shot him for the experiment … but the thing is … you did … the tachyon theory is wrong … and he’s dead.

Forgive the morbid example. I hope I have not offended. Hopefully, it was at least mildly amusing … and demonstrative to some extent.

 

[kesa82]

As for time travel into the past, a crude form of this already tangibly exists ; movies, audio recordings. I can watch a movie that was produced by, and depicts, people, all of whom are now dead.
Our memories aren’t even tangible, and yet we clearly have memories. even memories that documentation later seems to demonstrate are accurate.

It seems to me then not unreasonable to suppose that the " whole hog ", not just a photograph, not just a line of writing on a piece of crumbling paper, but the totality, is still, somewhere, somehow, accessible.

Then there is the idea, anyone know the precise scripture ? that nothing we do is hidden, that on judgment day all will become known, all will be revealed.

And HOW could that be?

The simplest explanation, it seems to me, is that the past can be SEEN. ( also that thoughts , motives, feelings, of the past can be seen. )

 

[kesa82]

As for time travel into the future … I have long thought that is the simplest explanation of how God can be omnipotent , and yet at the same time we can have free will.

Our perception of time as linear is false.
The past, present, and future are actually all the same time.

Unfortunately I never studied physics, and describing what I mean in layman’s terms has proven devilishly impossible, though, believe me or not, I can see an image in my head of what I fail to describe adequately.

 

[Areopagite]

As for time travel into the past, a crude form of this already tangibly exists ; movies, audio recordings. I can watch a movie that was produced by, and depicts, people, all of whom are now dead.
Our memories aren’t even tangible, and yet we clearly have memories. even memories that documentation later seems to demonstrate are accurate.

Yes, that’s true. I guess you could stretch the term and call viewing of the past a kind of time-travel. There’s nothing problematic with that.

The time-travel that I do have a problem with is time-travel that changes or at least affects the past. That stuff just doesn’t make any sense. And this tachyon theory about free will depends on that. Therefore, I think it doesn’t work.

Agree? Disagree?

 

[kesa82]

I would have to say that while I think travel to the past IS possible, changing it is not.

So you can go back and walk with Hitler to elementary school, but if you want to kill him, or even just trip him, you are going to be in for a disappointment.

That is, I agree with you apparently. I’m not familiar with tachyons.

I just enjoy the subject. I want to know who Jack the Ripper, and the man in the Iron mask, were.

 

[vz71]

OK…if these scientists are showing that we actually decide to move an arm a full 10 seconds before moving it, then I propose an experiment.

Use the same detection equipment that was in place for the initial finding.
Place a light on a table nearby that the patient can see.
Have the subject raise their arm when the light goes off.
Blink the light at random.

Check the results to see if the subject is actually able to predict the light 10 seconds out.

I would be very interested to see the result.

 

[fosio]

OK…if these scientists are showing that we actually decide to move an arm a full 10 seconds before moving it, then I propose an experiment.

Use the same detection equipment that was in place for the initial finding.
Place a light on a table nearby that the patient can see.
Have the subject raise their arm when the light goes off.
Blink the light at random.

Check the results to see if the subject is actually able to predict the light 10 seconds out.

I would be very interested to see the result.

This wouldn’t have any bearing on the current experimental results. However it would have bearing on my theory of tachyon time travel explaining the results. If my theory were correct, one would expect to see for example if the light is off for 7 seconds and then on for 5 seconds, that for at least part of the time the light was off, the evidence of the decision would already be there due to the time traveling tachyons (which can also affect other less exotic particles as they time travel).

So my theory far from being science fiction is an actually testable hypothesis.

 

[vz71]

This wouldn’t have any bearing on the current experimental results. However it would have bearing on my theory of tachyon time travel explaining the results.

I have my doubts.
Rather then traveling 10 seconds into the past, I believe it would strengthen the concept of precognition.

 

[Ghoti]

I would have to say that while I think travel to the past IS possible, changing it is not.

So you can go back and walk with Hitler to elementary school, but if you want to kill him, or even just trip him, you are going to be in for a disappointment.

That is, I agree with you apparently. I’m not familiar with tachyons.

I just enjoy the subject. I want to know who Jack the Ripper, and the man in the Iron mask, were.

I have a number of theories (and I mean theories in layman's terms, not the scientific technical term) about time travel hatched while having a few insomniac nights:

The “River” Theory. Time flows like a river. You throw a pebble in the stream, it makes a few ripples, but not much farther downstream the river is unchanged. Drop a boulder in, and the changes are effected even further downstream. Enough boulders could even divert the river from its original path altogether. In other words, one might travel back in time, and have a look around, but might only have a local ripple effect, and not drastically affect the timeline; on the other hand, a major action, like killing someone, might disrupt the timeline in a major way, such that were one to return back to one’s start point, things could be extremely different. The odd thing would be that one might not know what might be a major or minor change to the timeline.

The “Sound of Thunder” Theory. Named for a short story by (I think) Ray Bradbury. You go back in time, step on a butterfly, and when you come back, everything is changed. How radically things change is unclear. It might spin everything hopelessly out of whack, or in the short story’s case, just off-track enough that everything becomes a “mirror-universe” scenario.

“Murphy’s” Theory of Time Travel. Murphy’s Law states, “If anything can possibly go wrong, it will.” My “Murphy’s Theory” is, “If anything can possibly happen, it will.” The multiverse is a giant Plinko game that we travel down, our decisions moving us between different and divergent timelines. Traveling back in time does not change the future, only the path that we are on. This would get rid of the “grandfather paradox” and the “predestination paradox” because you would, at that moment, move into the timeline where that event happened. It might be possible, with this theory, that you could meet yourself – only it wouldn’t truly be “you”, just a particular timeline-specific “avatar(?)” of you; one would not have to worry about one’s “soul” being shared between bodies, as each “avatar” would be a distinct person.

The “Self-Repairing Timeline” Theory. No matter what you do in the past, time will change surrounding details to preserve as much of the timeline as possible. Kill Hitler before 1933? Ernst Röhm becomes Führer, and everything else realigns. Stop Gavrilo Princip from killing the Archduke? Archduke keels over with a heart attack, Austria blames Serbia, everything happens as per usual.

The “Mind of God” Theory. From the title of a short story, where a man is sent back in time to kill Hitler. He goes back, but when he arrives, he doesn’t know why he’s there, and thus can’t complete the plan. In other words, you can go back, but won’t be able to change anything.

Anyway, this is what happens when it’s 30˚C with 95% humidity, and I can’t sleep.

 

[Bob_Crowley]

I would have to say that while I think travel to the past IS possible, changing it is not.

So you can go back and walk with Hitler to elementary school, but if you want to kill him, or even just trip him, you are going to be in for a disappointment.

That is, I agree with you apparently. I’m not familiar with tachyons.

I just enjoy the subject. I want to know who Jack the Ripper, and the man in the Iron mask, were.

I don’t think time travel is possible, and that God has ensured we can’t go back and change the past. If time travel were possible, we’d have future travellers giving themselves away, and it hasn’t happened.

I’ve also got a theory that God is going to drive us off the planet, and that we will use teleporting as the means of transport when it’s advanced enough. However teleporting always means the original has to be destroyed. So I think this is another safe guard God has built into the physical universe so that we can’t clone ourselves in any real sense.

For God however, He can see all past, present and future activities, although I think He holds Himself back regarding the future. If the future were immutable and already known, irrespective of our choices, then He and the devil would hardly be fighting their war over our individual fates. Nevertheless He knows certain key points. The Scriptures said “one must be lost” and Judas was the poor bloke in question.

I’ve said before elsewhere that the night my father died, he appeared in my room. He started with an apology for the way he’d treated me, we conversed and argued and accused, and at the end he gave this terrifying scream and disappeared. Most of the time however he seemed to be looking over my head enthralled. When I turned around to see what he was looking at, all I could see was the wall.

But sometimes he seemed to be hideously ashamed of what he was looking at, and would hide his face behind his hands, and try not to look at it. Then that would pass and he would look enthralled again. Just before the hideous scream, he looked completely dejected.

I suspect he could see his life and when he was trying not to look, I assume he was totally ashamed of some things he had done. Therefore he could see the past.

He could also see the future. He made several predictions, but I’ll repeat one here. He said at one stage, “You’ll meet a pastor. You’ll think he’s great, but all he’ll do is discourage you even more!” Now at the time I was an atheist, but became a Christian nearly four years later. About eight or nine years after than, I sat in the pastor’s office while he said, “I owe you an apology. You needed encouragement, but all I’ve done is to discourage you even more.” I pointed out to him my father’s prediction, almost word for word, and he replied, “You really did see your father that night.”’

We can’t travel in time, but after death the spiritual self seems to be able to see into the future, although I suspect my father was only being shown a limited number of future events. We also see our past displayed, as Christ said, “What is hidden will be shouted to the rooftops” and “I tell you, a man will account for every useless word.”

I don’t know about you, but I’ve got a few things I’d like to go back in time and undo, and unsay, and unthink.

 

[Drawmack]

In 2008, building upon earlier results, it was demonstrated that the brain has already “decided” to raise one hand or the other about 10 seconds before the person reports having consciously decided to do so. Some have used this demonstration to argue that free will is an illusion, others to suppose that the free will resides in the unconscious activity of the brain (which is a no starter since free will is about conscious decision making, if the sub and unconciousness were free will then we’d all be sinning in our dreams).

I take a different tack. I think it is clear from our subjective experience that we decide to raise one hand or the other when we consciously make that decision. How then do I explain the demonstration that the brain has already “decided” 10 seconds prior to any awareness on my part? Time travel. The possibility that is overlooked is that maybe my conscious decision (i.e. the conscious decision of my brain) causes ripple effects BACKWARD through time, with particles/waves that travel backward through time. Physics has already postulated that particles that travel fast than the speed of light (or in an alternate conception, particles that don’t travel faster than light but that travel backward through time) exist – they are known as tachyons. Maybe tachyons or something exotic like tachyons is operative in our brain and explains how decisions are “seen” in the brain 10 seconds before they occur.

Stephen Hawking postulated once that the arrow of time for the whole universe would reverse one day so these kinds of exotic time properties are not just science fiction. The hypothesis that tachyon-like waves/particles are responsible for the 10 second pre-viewing of decision making may seem far fetched but IMO what is even more far fetched is the idea that my conscious experience of decision making is not valid. So, by a quasi-Moorean move, I elect to accept time traveling neural processes over the alternatives.

I think you’re way off base. If you do some reading in advanced computer sciences you’ll discover a completely different possibility here. Mind when I say advanced computer sciences I’m speaking as someone who is halfway to a masters in the subject.

We know that the human brain processes information about a million (really rough estimate) times faster than the fastest super computer. We also know, that from it’s make up it shouldn’t work this fast.

In computer sciences we have something called a neural net which is an attempt to build a networked cluster of computers which operates in a similar fashion to the brain. When we built this we found that it began to work on predictive branching in a way we had never though of.

How predictive branching works is when a computer encounters a branch (a decision) it guesses which branch the program will take and begins reading those instructions into memory before they are requested. This speeds up execution of the program, unless the wrong branch is predicted, then it slows down the program. (This is a gross over simplification.) The neural net found a way around the possible slow down.

In the neural net when a branch was encountered it wouldn’t, really, predict a path to take. Instead it would set one computer to work on each possible branch. Then once it knew which branch to take it would divert to the correct system. In this way it always sped up the processing. It is possible that the brain is doing something similar.

The brain could be saying, hey, I could have to raise my hand soon, if I need to raise a hand it will be the right hand. So, it “makes the decision” before the decision is made. But actually it’s just preparing for a possibility so if the possibility becomes a reality it already knows what to do and can react more quickly.

I’d like to see if the research showed any findings of things being set up which didn’t come to fruition. That would seem to be the deciding factor in if I’m right or not.

 

[Drawmack]

As for time travel into the future … I have long thought that is the simplest explanation of how God can be omnipotent , and yet at the same time we can have free will.

Our perception of time as linear is false.
The past, present, and future are actually all the same time.

Unfortunately I never studied physics, and describing what I mean in layman’s terms has proven devilishly impossible, though, believe me or not, I can see an image in my head of what I fail to describe adequately.

Think of it in terms of physical dimensions.

We are a four dimensional being. We are capable of moving within three of these dimensions: height, width, and depth but the fourth (time) constrains us. To show what I am saying imagine a three dimensional being: he can only move within height and width, but not depth. Kind of like the king on a playing card.

If we placed this king on a mobius strip and he walked, it would look like experiment 1 in this video youtube.com/watch?v=4bcm-kPIuHE . He would have no concept that he had crossed over to the other side of the strip. However, we are four dimensional. So, we can see that the strip has two sides and we can see that the king, in fact, did cross sides. We can witness the kings movement in all the dimensions we can move within even if that king didn’t

Now imagine that God is more than 4 dimensional. This would allow God to move in time the way that we move in height, depth, and width. Not so much time happening all at once (that would be like height, depth, and width existing at all the same place) but more that all time is always present and he can “walk around in it” the way you or I walks around in a room.

So, we can have pre-desitnation and free-will at the same time. The reason is that God knows our answer before we know the question. Not because he controlled the answer, he just walked to the part of the room where we answer and saw what it is.

Does that make sense?

 

[Drawmack]

I would have to say that while I think travel to the past IS possible, changing it is not.

So you can go back and walk with Hitler to elementary school, but if you want to kill him, or even just trip him, you are going to be in for a disappointment.

That is, I agree with you apparently. I’m not familiar with tachyons.

I just enjoy the subject. I want to know who Jack the Ripper, and the man in the Iron mask, were.

About 5 years ago a book was found that was the first Jack the Ripper book ever written. The book was written by one of the lead detectives in the case and owned by another of the lead detectives in the case. The book contains the sentence, “We knew who Jack was at the time – we just couldn’t prove it.” Penciled in the margin next to this sentence was a name. Research into the name showed that it was an American merchant who was in England every time there was a murder and that the murder’s abruptly stopped after this man was arrested in New York for attempting to kill a prostitute. Unfortunately, I forget his name at this point.

There, now you’ve time traveled today.

 

[Drawmack]

OK…if these scientists are showing that we actually decide to move an arm a full 10 seconds before moving it, then I propose an experiment.

Use the same detection equipment that was in place for the initial finding.
Place a light on a table nearby that the patient can see.
Have the subject raise their arm when the light goes off.
Blink the light at random.

Check the results to see if the subject is actually able to predict the light 10 seconds out.

I would be very interested to see the result.

Read my post about neural nets … this wouldn’t show prediction of the light going out.

 

[Drawmack]

This wouldn’t have any bearing on the current experimental results. However it would have bearing on my theory of tachyon time travel explaining the results. If my theory were correct, one would expect to see for example if the light is off for 7 seconds and then on for 5 seconds, that for at least part of the time the light was off, the evidence of the decision would already be there due to the time traveling tachyons (which can also affect other less exotic particles as they time travel).

So my theory far from being science fiction is an actually testable hypothesis.

No it’s not, you’d have to test for the existence of tachyons and see if they showed up in conjunction with the decision being made. We cannot test inside someone’s head for tachyons so your hypothesis cannot be tested.

 

[Don_Schneider]

In 2008, building upon earlier results, it was demonstrated that the brain has already “decided” to raise one hand or the other about 10 seconds before the person reports having consciously decided to do so. Some have used this demonstration to argue that free will is an illusion, others to suppose that the free will resides in the unconscious activity of the brain (which is a no starter since free will is about conscious decision making, if the sub and unconciousness were free will then we’d all be sinning in our dreams).

I take a different tack. I think it is clear from our subjective experience that we decide to raise one hand or the other when we consciously make that decision. How then do I explain the demonstration that the brain has already “decided” 10 seconds prior to any awareness on my part? Time travel. The possibility that is overlooked is that maybe my conscious decision (i.e. the conscious decision of my brain) causes ripple effects BACKWARD through time, with particles/waves that travel backward through time. Physics has already postulated that particles that travel fast than the speed of light (or in an alternate conception, particles that don’t travel faster than light but that travel backward through time) exist – they are known as tachyons. Maybe tachyons or something exotic like tachyons is operative in our brain and explains how decisions are “seen” in the brain 10 seconds before they occur.

Stephen Hawking postulated once that the arrow of time for the whole universe would reverse one day so these kinds of exotic time properties are not just science fiction. The hypothesis that tachyon-like waves/particles are responsible for the 10 second pre-viewing of decision making may seem far fetched but IMO what is even more far fetched is the idea that my conscious experience of decision making is not valid. So, by a quasi-Moorean move, I elect to accept time traveling neural processes over the alternatives.

Dear Fosio:

Your musings are very much in line with John Cramer’s Transactional Interpretation of quantum mechanics. In the event you are unfamiliar with it, the interpretation postulates the existence of advanced and retarded waves that travel backwards and forward in time respectively and then “agree” on an actualized outcome of myriad possible outcomes in regard to a quantum event. If you are unfamiliar with it, here is the URL for Dr. Cramer’s paper on his website at his university:

npl.washington.edu/ti/

By the way, Dr. Cramer has been a regular nonfiction scientific contributor to Analog for many years. (I assume he still is as I haven’t read the magazine in several years now.) I’m surprised this interpretation doesn’t get more attention as it preserves realism without resorting to the seemingly outlandish idea of the amount of matter that the Many-Worlds Interpretation postulates exists.

Dr. Cramer’s interpretation would seem to me to better explain your speculation than would the concept of tachyons. A common misunderstanding of Einstein’s STR is that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. This is not what the theory indicates. Rather, it indicates that nothing can break through the light barrier. Therefore, if the entirely speculative concept of tachyons proves true, then tachyons would have had to come into being already traveling faster than the speed of light. Since according to STR they couldn’t penetrate the light barrier from the outer side anymore than anything can for our side, I fail to see how they could account for your idea. However, if I am misunderstanding you, please advise, and I’d be appreciative to be corrected.

 

[Don_Schneider]

Yes, that’s true. I guess you could stretch the term and call viewing of the past a kind of time-travel. There’s nothing problematic with that.

The time-travel that I do have a problem with is time-travel that changes or at least affects the past. That stuff just doesn’t make any sense. And this tachyon theory about free will depends on that. Therefore, I think it doesn’t work.

Agree? Disagree?

Dear Areopagite,

If time travel into the past is possible, then I am absolutely convinced that whomever ultimately proves it will at the same time prove the validity of the Many-Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics as it is the only interpretation of QM that overcomes your inferred objection of changing past events. This is why I used it in regard to the time travel element of my short story (linked to below).

If you ever have an hour to read it, then perhaps you might like to contemplate how it not only answers your objection to TT as stated above, but also answers the other common objection that if time travel into the past were possible, then how come no one from our future has come back to demonstrate such. The story (actually the MWI it invokes) answers that as well, albeit far more subtly. It would take some pondering to realize why.

 

[Don_Schneider]

Dear Fosio,

I just came across an open letter by Dr. Cramer which is a response to someone who apparently wondered the same thing I noted I did in my previous response to you. That is, why doesn’t the Transactional Interpretation get more attention? I think you will find the letter most interesting.

74.125.47.132/search?q=cache:fxcaqJJKmzYJ:www.tcm.phy.cam.ac.uk/~mdt26/cramer_letter.txt+objections+the+transactional+interpretation&cd=9&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

 

[vz71]

Read my post about neural nets … this wouldn’t show prediction of the light going out.

Sure it would.

Think about it for a minute.
If we turn the light on and off at 15 second intervals, and we see the nueral pattern indicating the decision to raise the arm at those same intervals then we can reasonably conclude the subject has made the decision before the light came on.

There will be a 5 second interval when there should be no such pattern shown.

A ‘ready state’ that you describe would show, but could be defeated with random patterns in the light.