10/06/2026
Information Across Spacetime
A Research Framework for Dimensional Reconstruction, Quantum
Teleportation, Temporal Perception, and Future State-Transfer Technology
Gregg Gorin
October 6, 2026
Abstract
This working paper develops a disciplined research framework connecting four sub-
jects that are frequently blended together without sufficient care: dimensional recon-
struction, quantum teleportation, spacetime geometry, and the human experience of
time. Magnetic resonance imaging provides a concrete example of how spatially in-
dexed lower-dimensional measurements can be assembled into a three-dimensional
volume and, when repeated over time or physiological phase, into a four-dimensional
dataset. Quantum teleportation provides a different but complementary example:
an unknown quantum state can be reconstructed at a remote system by consum-
ing shared entanglement and transmitting classical measurement results. Relativ-
ity supplies the causal spacetime structure within which both operations occur. Re-
search in holography and quantum gravity further suggests that entanglement and
geometry may be related, although this relationship has not produced a physical
transportation wormhole or a method for moving macroscopic matter. Déjà vu is
included as a testable problem in temporal perception and memory rather than as
assumed evidence of information arriving from the future. On this foundation, the pa-
per proposes Project SPAN—Spacetime, Perception, and Networked State Transfer—
a staged program combining medical-image reconstruction, quantum-circuit simula-
tion, networked quantum experiments, emergent-spacetime models, and prospective
temporal-perception studies. The program advances through reproducible measure-
ments and maintains explicit boundaries among demonstrated results, testable hy-
potheses, and speculation.
Keywords: quantum teleportation; spacetime; fourth dimension; MRI; DICOM; quan-
tum information; wormholes; time travel; déjà vu; dimensional reconstruction
1. Introduction
The phrase “fourth dimension” is used for several different concepts. In mathematics
it can denote a fourth independent coordinate, including a fourth spatial coordinate
in Euclidean geometry. In relativity, an event is described by three spatial coordi-
nates and one temporal coordinate. In popular culture the phrase often becomes a
1
container for parallel worlds, consciousness, ghosts, or time travel. These meanings
cannot be treated as interchangeable.
The aim of this paper is to identify the measurable relationship shared by dimensional
imaging, quantum teleportation, and spacetime physics: a physical system can be
described by structured information whose acquisition, transfer, and recon-
struction occur at definite locations and times. This statement does not assume
that every system can be completely measured, copied, or reconstructed. Quantum
mechanics imposes fundamental restrictions, while engineering imposes enormous
practical ones. The statement instead provides a common language for asking pre-
cise questions.
The motivating experience is straightforward. An MRI scanner records a body region
in a sequence of spatially localized measurements. Software organizes those mea-
surements into a volume that can be viewed from orientations that were not acquired
as ordinary photographs. This resembles the dimensional-slice thought experiment
used in discussions of Flatland: lower-dimensional sections can encode information
about a higher-dimensional structure. MRI does not demonstrate an unseen spatial
dimension, but it does demonstrate the power of coordinate-indexed reconstruction.
Quantum teleportation moves the discussion from classical images to quantum states.
The process transfers the state of a microscopic quantum system without moving the
original physical carrier through the intervening space. The name encourages com-
parisons with fictional transporters, yet the actual protocol is both more restricted
and more scientifically important. It underlies emerging quantum networks and mod-
ular quantum computing.
This paper asks how far these ideas can be joined without exceeding the evidence
and which parts can be turned into working technology.
Figure 1: Project SPAN conceptual framework
2
2. Dimensions, Coordinates, and Reconstruction
A dimension can be defined operationally as an independent coordinate required to
identify a point in a space. A point on a line requires one coordinate; a point on a
plane requires two; a point in ordinary space requires three. An event in relativistic
spacetime requires four values: three describing where and one describing when [1].
Time is therefore part of a four-dimensional spacetime description, but it is not simply
another ordinary direction through which a person may move at will. The spacetime
metric, light-cone structure, and causal ordering distinguish temporal from spatial
separation.
Higher-dimensional objects are mathematically well defined even when human visual
perception cannot represent them directly. A tesseract is the four-dimensional ana-
logue of a cube. Drawings of tesseracts are projections into two or three dimensions,
just as a drawing of a cube is a projection rather than the cube itself. Cross-sections
and projections allow a lower-dimensional observer to acquire partial information
about a higher-dimensional structure. They do not prove that the represented higher-
dimensional structure exists physically.
This distinction establishes the first rule of Project SPAN: geometric possibility,
theoretical physical possibility, and experimental observation are separate
levels of evidence.
3. MRI as a Dimensional Information System
MRI measures signals produced by nuclear-spin behavior in a magnetic field and
reconstructs spatially resolved tissue contrast. A typical image series consists of two-
dimensional arrays accompanied by metadata describing where each image plane
belongs relative to the patient. The DICOM standard defines fields including Image
Position (Patient), Image Orientation (Patient), Pixel Spacing, and Slice Thickness [2].
Together these fields can locate pixels and slices in patient-relative three-dimensional
space.
This has an important forensic consequence. File names, directory order, and a sepa-
rate disc index are convenient organizational tools, but they need not be the authorita-
tive spatial index. When the DICOM geometry survives, software can often regroup
files by study and series, calculate the normal vector of each image plane, project
slice positions onto that vector, and restore the spatial sequence. If the spatial meta-
data has been stripped, corrupted, or made inconsistent, anatomy-based alignment
may offer an approximation, but it cannot recreate information that no longer exists.
Time-resolved volumetric imaging extends the model. A sequence of reconstructed
volumes can be represented as
𝐼(𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑧, 𝑡),
where each voxel value is indexed by three spatial coordinates and a temporal or
physiological-phase coordinate. Four-dimensional flow MRI additionally estimates a
3
three-component velocity vector through the cardiac cycle and is used to analyze
cardiovascular hemodynamics [3]. In radiotherapy, 4D MRI may organize volumes
by time, respiratory phase, or respiratory amplitude [4]. “Four-dimensional” here
has a precise data meaning: a three-dimensional field sampled across an additional
independent parameter.
MRI therefore supplies the first experimental platform for this research program. It
allows a real question to be tested: under which metadata-loss conditions can a spatial
or spatiotemporal volume be reconstructed exactly, approximately, or not at all?
4. Quantum Teleportation
Quantum teleportation was formally proposed by Bennett and colleagues in 1993 [5].
Consider an unknown qubit
|𝜓⟩𝐴 = 𝛼|0⟩ + 𝛽|1⟩, |𝛼|2 + |𝛽|2 = 1.
Alice and Bob pre-share an entangled Bell pair involving systems 𝐵 and 𝐶. Alice
performs a joint Bell-state measurement on 𝐴 and 𝐵. That measurement has four
possible outcomes, which can be encoded in two classical bits. Alice sends those bits
to Bob. Depending on their values, Bob applies one of four corrections—commonly
represented by 𝐼, 𝑋, 𝑍, or 𝑋𝑍—to system 𝐶. After the correction, 𝐶 is in state |𝜓⟩.
The protocol has five defining properties.
1. The unknown state is reconstructed at Bob’s system.
2. The original state at Alice’s system is destroyed by the joint measurement.
3. The material particle carrying Alice’s original state does not travel to Bob.
4. Shared entanglement is consumed as a resource.
5. Bob cannot complete the reconstruction until Alice’s classical message arrives.
The last property preserves relativity. Entanglement produces correlations, but it
does not provide a controllable faster-than-light message. Quantum teleportation
therefore transfers a state through a combination of nonclassical correlation and or-
dinary causal communication [6].
The no-cloning principle also matters. An arbitrary unknown quantum state cannot
be duplicated perfectly while leaving the original intact. Teleportation succeeds pre-
cisely because it transfers the state and destroys the source instance. This feature
separates quantum teleportation from ordinary copying and complicates any proposal
to teleport a macroscopic living system.
5. From Qubits to Future Technology
Quantum teleportation is already an enabling process rather than a distant fantasy.
Experiments have transferred photonic states over metropolitan fiber distances, cre-
ated entanglement between separated quantum memories, and teleported quantum
gates between modules [7–9]. These results support a technology ladder:
4
Level Capability Status
1 3D and 4D anatomical
reconstruction
Operational
2 Teleportation of individual
quantum states
Demonstrated
3 Teleported operations
between quantum
processors
Demonstrated
experimentally
4 Metropolitan quantum
networks and distributed
memories
Active development
5 Reliable transfer of
complex many-body states
Research frontier
6 Atomic reconstruction of
nonliving macroscopic
matter
No demonstrated path
7 Human reconstruction
with continuity of identity
No known method
8 Engineered physical
spacetime shortcut
Mathematical models only
9 Backward-time
communication or travel
No evidence or
demonstrated mechanism
A conceivable remote-reconstruction architecture would measure a source, encode a
description, distribute entanglement, teleport selected quantum degrees of freedom,
transmit classical correction data, assemble matter already present at the destination,
and verify the result. This would resemble remote manufacturing combined with
quantum state transfer. It would not require the same atoms to move between sites.
The barriers to applying this idea to a person are profound. MRI is a millimeter-scale
tissue map, not an atomic or quantum description. A human body contains on the
order of 1028 atoms. Their complete quantum state cannot be extracted as an ordinary
list without disturbing the state, and environmental decoherence prevents a body
from behaving as a single controllable qubit register. Even a structurally convincing
reconstruction would leave an unresolved identity question: whether informational
similarity preserves the original person’s subjective continuity.
The scientifically responsible target is therefore not a human transporter. It is pro-
gressively more capable state transfer between engineered quantum systems,
accompanied by classical structural reconstruction.
6. Entanglement and Spacetime Geometry
The holographic principle arose from black-hole thermodynamics and quantum-
gravity research. It proposes that the information needed to describe a gravitational
region may admit an equivalent lower-dimensional description [10]. This does not es-
5
tablish that ordinary reality is a computer simulation or a literal movie projected from
a surface elsewhere. It is a proposed equivalence between physical descriptions.
The ER=EPR conjecture goes further by proposing a relationship between Einstein–
Rosen bridges and quantum entanglement. Gao, Jafferis, and Wall constructed a
traversable-wormhole solution in an idealized anti-de Sitter setting by coupling the
two boundaries and producing an appropriate quantum stress-energy effect [11].
Their result explicitly does not allow violation of causality.
This line of research leads to a striking dual description. A process described from
one perspective as quantum teleportation may be described from another as informa-
tion traversing a wormhole geometry. A quantum-processor experiment later repro-
duced selected dynamics of a simplified model [12]. The processor did not generate
a physical opening in laboratory spacetime. It implemented a quantum system whose
mathematical behavior corresponded to the chosen model.
The practical research question is still significant: can laboratory quantum-
information experiments reveal general principles about how geometry may
emerge from entanglement? That question can be addressed through circuit
simulation, error analysis, scrambling measurements, and reproduction of published
protocols without claiming that a transport portal has been built.
7. Time Travel and Causality
Forward time travel in the relativistic sense is established. Two clocks following dif-
ferent paths through spacetime can accumulate different proper times. High velocity
and gravitational potential alter elapsed time relative to another observer. Precision
clocks and satellite navigation systems routinely account for these effects.
Backward time travel is different. General relativity contains mathematical solu-
tions with closed timelike curves. Certain wormhole arrangements have also been
discussed as possible time-machine geometries. No usable closed timelike curve or
traversable spacetime wormhole has been observed.
Hawking’s chronology-protection analysis argued that the quantum stress-energy
near the formation of closed timelike curves may become large enough for backre-
action to prevent their appearance [13]. Chronology protection remains a conjecture
rather than a completed theory of quantum gravity, but it illustrates the size of the
missing step between a mathematical solution and a realizable machine.
Ordinary quantum teleportation offers no bypass. Bob requires Alice’s classical mea-
surement result, and that information remains constrained by the light cone. Tele-
portation does not transmit a controllable message into the past or outside the future
light cone.
8. Déjà Vu and Experienced Time
Déjà vu is relevant to this program because it concerns how the brain labels an event
in time, recognizes familiarity, and estimates what will happen next. It should be
6
investigated as a cognitive and neurological phenomenon before being treated as
evidence of altered spacetime.
Research has proposed several mechanisms: a temporary mismatch between familiar-
ity and recollection, implicit recognition without source identification, divided atten-
tion, and neurological disruption. Déjà vu can also occur in association with temporal-
lobe seizure activity, although ordinary déjà vu is common in healthy individuals
[14,15].
Cleary and Claxton tested the frequent claim that déjà vu feels predictive. Partici-
pants experiencing experimentally induced déjà vu reported a stronger feeling that
they knew the next turn in a virtual path, but their actual predictions did not exceed
chance [16]. The result supports an illusion of prediction or confidence bias rather
than demonstrated foreknowledge.
Personal experience can still contribute data if it is recorded prospectively. A use-
ful entry must be timestamped before the outcome, specific enough to fail, scored
under a rule defined in advance, and compared with chance and matched control pre-
dictions. Sleep, stress, medication, familiarity cues, and environmental context can
be recorded as possible explanatory variables. This method respects the experience
without assuming its cause.
9. Project SPAN
Project SPAN—Spacetime, Perception, and Networked State Transfer—
organizes the research into five tracks.
9.1 Track A: Dimensional Reconstruction
Build a forensic DICOM system that detects files independent of filenames, groups
them into studies and series, validates coordinate metadata, detects duplicates and
gaps, reconstructs 3D/4D volumes, preserves source hashes, and reports which place-
ments are exact, inferred, ambiguous, or impossible.
The initial experiment will use a de-identified public dataset. A verified volume will
be reconstructed, filenames and directory indexes will be randomized, and metadata
fields will be removed in controlled stages. Slice-order accuracy, spatial error, gap
detection, false grouping, and hash preservation will be measured.
9.2 Track B: Quantum-Teleportation Simulator
Develop an interactive program that prepares an arbitrary qubit, constructs an entan-
gled pair, performs a Bell measurement, transmits two classical bits, applies Bob’s
correction, and calculates fidelity. A spacetime panel will display the preparation,
measurement, message, and correction events with their light cones. Noise and de-
coherence controls will show how real hardware departs from the ideal protocol.
7
9.3 Track C: Quantum-Network Testbed
Run the teleportation circuits on accessible quantum hardware. Compare simulators
with hardware measurements, characterize noise, test entanglement swapping, and
study how network delay and imperfect entanglement affect fidelity. This track can
produce reproducible code and real measurements using present technology.
9.4 Track D: Emergent-Spacetime Models
Implement simplified published circuits related to scrambling and traversable-
wormhole teleportation. Compare circuit observables with predicted recovery
behavior. Every output will be labeled as a simulation of a mathematical model
rather than evidence that a physical wormhole exists.
9.5 Track E: Temporal-Perception Study
Create a prospective logging system for déjà vu, perceived repetition, temporal dis-
tortion, and claimed prediction. The system will lock entries before outcomes, calcu-
late predetermined scores, and compare performance with controls. It can also help
distinguish recurring environmental cues from apparently novel experiences.
10. Evidence Standard and Falsifiability
Project SPAN will use three labels throughout:
• Established: repeatedly measured or demonstrated within a defined domain.
• Hypothesis: produces a specific, falsifiable prediction.
• Speculation: mathematically or conceptually interesting but currently lacks a
practical test or supporting measurement.
Claims advance only by meeting a defined test. A reconstruction method must out-
perform filename ordering and correctly identify missing information. A teleportation
circuit must exceed the appropriate classical fidelity threshold. A temporal-prediction
claim must exceed chance under prospective scoring. An emergent-spacetime model
must reproduce published observables and disclose all simplifications.
This standard prevents a compelling analogy from being mistaken for evidence.
11. Discussion
The shared concept across the project is not disappearance, mysticism, or travel
through an invisible direction. It is state reconstruction under physical con-
straints. MRI reconstructs a classical spatial field from measured signals. Quantum
teleportation reconstructs a quantum state by consuming entanglement and using
classical information. Spacetime determines which operations can causally influence
one another. Neuroscience studies how an observer’s brain reconstructs familiarity
and temporal order.
8
Future technologies are likely to grow first from quantum networking: modular pro-
cessors, quantum memories, distributed sensing, secure communication, and pre-
cision timing. These capabilities may eventually transfer increasingly complex en-
gineered states. Combining them with advanced imaging, programmable matter,
robotics, and synthetic biology could enable remote reconstruction of nonliving sys-
tems or biological components. Each additional level requires information that cur-
rent imaging does not capture and control that present hardware does not possess.
The wormhole connection is valuable because it may reveal that geometry and quan-
tum information are two descriptions of a deeper structure. It does not presently
turn quantum teleportation into instantaneous transportation. Likewise, déjà vu is
valuable because it reveals how strongly a subjective sense of time can diverge from
measured prediction. Its study may improve models of memory and awareness even
if it never indicates physical time travel.
12. Conclusion
Dimensional reconstruction, quantum teleportation, spacetime physics, and tempo-
ral perception can be studied within one coherent program when their boundaries
are kept clear. MRI demonstrates reconstruction from coordinate-indexed measure-
ments. Quantum teleportation demonstrates remote reconstruction of an unknown
microscopic state using entanglement and causal classical communication. Relativity
supplies the four-dimensional framework and prevents the protocol from becoming
faster-than-light signaling. Quantum-gravity models suggest a possible relationship
between entanglement and geometry, while physical wormholes and backward time
travel remain unobserved. Déjà vu supplies a tractable experiment in memory and
prediction confidence, not established evidence of foreknowledge.
Project SPAN converts these connections into a staged program that begins with soft-
ware and reproducible experiments available now. Its long-term purpose is to deter-
mine how information about a physical system can be measured, preserved, trans-
ferred, reconstructed, and experienced across space and time—while stating plainly
where knowledge ends and possibility begins.
References
1. Max Planck Institute for Gravitational Physics. “Spacetime.” Einstein Online.
https://www.einstein-online.info/en/explandict/spacetime/
2. National Electrical Manufacturers Association. “Image Plane Module.” DICOM
PS3.3. https://dicom.nema.org/medical/dicom/current/output/chtml/part03/sect_C.7.6.2.html
3. Dyverfeldt, P., et al. “4D Flow Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Consensus
Statement: 2023 Update.” Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance 25
(2023). PMID 37474977. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37474977/
4. Stemkens, B., et al. “Nuts and Bolts of 4D-MRI for Radiotherapy.” Physics in
Medicine & Biology 63 (2018). PMID 30272573. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30272573/
5. Bennett, C. H., et al. “Teleporting an Unknown Quantum State via Dual Classi-
cal and Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Channels.” Physical Review Letters 70 (1993):
9
1895–1899. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.70.1895
6. American Physical Society. “Quantum Milestones, 1993: Teleportation Is Not
Science Fiction.” Physics 18 (2025): 52. https://physics.aps.org/articles/v18/52
7. Valivarthi, R., et al. “Quantum Teleportation across a Metropolitan Fibre Net-
work.” Nature Photonics 10 (2016): 676–680. https://www.nature.com/articles/nphoton.2016.
8. Liu, J.-L., et al. “Creation of Memory–Memory Entanglement in a Metropolitan
Quantum Network.” Nature 629 (2024): 579–585. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-
024-07308-0
9. Main, D., et al. “Distributed Quantum Computing across an Optical Network
Link.” Nature 638 (2025): 383–388. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-
024-08404-x
10. Susskind, L. “The World as a Hologram.” Journal of Mathematical Physics 36
(1995): 6377–6396. https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/9409089
11. Gao, P., Jafferis, D. L., and Wall, A. C. “Traversable Wormholes via a
Double Trace Deformation.” Journal of High Energy Physics 2017, 151.
https://arxiv.org/abs/1608.05687
12. Jafferis, D., et al. “Traversable Wormhole Dynamics on a Quantum Processor.”
Nature 612 (2022): 51–55. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-05424-
3
13. Hawking, S. W. “Chronology Protection Conjecture.” Physical Review D 46
(1992): 603–611. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.46.603
14. Brown, A. S. “A Review of the Déjà Vu Experience.” Psychological Bulletin 129
(2003): 394–413. PMID 12784936. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12784936/
15. Bartolomei, F., et al. “Cortical Stimulation Study of the Role of Rhinal Cortex in
Déjà Vu and Reminiscence of Memories.” Neurology 63 (2004): 858–864. PMID
15365137. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15365137/
16. Cleary, A. M., and Claxton, A. B. “Déjà Vu: An Illusion of Prediction.” Psycholog-
ical Science 29 (2018): 635–644. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797617743018
10
