I honestly can’t recall if it was Pete Carroll or Phil Hine or both that made a discussion of retroactive enchantment. (It was probably Carroll, since that would fit in well with his cosmological model and his view on the malleability of time, but I’m not really in the mood to look it up and be sure.) Either way, the concept is a fairly clear one: you work a spell that manifests through channels that suggest events were changed in your favor at a time prior to your working of the spell. Either by directly targeting an already past event or through a haphazard coincidence of best available channels for manifestation, the cause (the spell) comes after the effect (the change).
Of course, this is always viewed from the perspective of a working in the present affecting the past. Part of that is our bias in insisting that the past is an actual real thing because we experienced it, and part of it is the fact that doing a spell to affect the future is seen as the normal course of events. According to Carroll’s cosmology, the past is just as ephemeral as the future, with both existing as orthogonal temporal dimensions that we experience as probability. The present moment exists as the meeting point of the probable future and likely past.
From a magical perspective, this means that the past is just as open to manipulation as the future. Enchanting to alter past events or send information, guidance, or other signals back to a past event becomes viable magical work. I have even seen it suggested that “sending” knowledge or information back to your past self once you learn the answer to a question might improve the efficacy of divination.
And that’s the question I’m working with. Because if you can send correct answers back to the past, it makes sense you can petition them from yourself in the future. And not just a simple divination, mind you, but an actual interaction with your future self.
Since I’m working with Carroll’s model here, the future self is just as imaginary as the past self. Perhaps that makes it easier to conjure. And who knows, perhaps the whole thing would simply be an elaborate enchantment to have a future like the one your “future self” cautions you about. The model helps augment the theory behind such a working, but adhering too strongly to it might get you caught up in the philosophical implications more than the practical concerns.
Carroll also goes by the rule of “enchant long and divine short.” I’m not sure if a working to consult future you counts as a divination or an enchantment, so I’m not sure how far out you can reach with any degree of accuracy. Again, it’s possible that such a working would help to enchant for the outcome you’re divining for, and might improve its accuracy, but might also lock you in to the results.
I think the real key is to set a specific target point, and when you reach that point, make sure to do a working to send the information you got back to the past you. Following up a temporal working at a future time ensures that the connection you forged was in fact a solid one, and probably improves the accuracy of further workings.
Unfortunately I don’t feel at liberty to discuss experiments in this area at this time, other than to say they have been promising so far.