This is a list of things rather than a concise statement of cause and effect followed by a proposed mechanism or other details. It's difficult for me to make sense of.
> bias the probabilities on one end, before the decoherence happens
Let's start there. What do you mean by that? What would this look like in concrete terms if I went and did it on the bench?
My understanding is that any measurement you take will appear random and uncorrelated until you have the data from the other side. At which point you can say "oh hey look, turns out it was actually correlated" but you can't demonstrate that fact until you have both sets of data in hand.
So in simple, concise, and concrete terms, what violation of the above are you proposing?
> bias the probabilities on one end, before the decoherence happens
Let's start there. What do you mean by that? What would this look like in concrete terms if I went and did it on the bench?
My understanding is that any measurement you take will appear random and uncorrelated until you have the data from the other side. At which point you can say "oh hey look, turns out it was actually correlated" but you can't demonstrate that fact until you have both sets of data in hand.
So in simple, concise, and concrete terms, what violation of the above are you proposing?