I really enjoy the arXiv blog, the blog that covers things in the pre-print archive for physics journals. Yes, we have an archive of things that have yet to be printed. Yes, we use a time machine for that. No, you can not borrow our time machine. The last time we loaned it out someone got drunk in it and then killed Hitler. Actually, every time we loan it out that happens. So, no more borrowing of the time machine. I apologize in advance.
Now on the the meaty things. Recently in arXiv this was posted: http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/arxiv/24124/#comments
As with anything amusing and controversy provoking the more extravegant claims are likely crap.
Let me sum thing up for people who didn't read the link. The kinds of errors people make around conjunctive and dysjunctive probabilities maps better onto the kind of treatment of probability used in quantum mechanics than in classical mechanics. The differences between these two is subtle and in general not significant as it comes to the kind of formalism used in the math with the quantum kind being a little looser in some ways than the classical kind. Also, it's useful to note that this is merely the same kind of math not a direct analog between say quantum and classical physics. And yet, it is neat to think that some of our fuck ups in reasoning suggest that something non-classical is happening in how we think. Though really that way lies SF, sciences current way of placing a label that says "here be dragons" on a weird and unlikely side road of thought.