 Maudlin’s main objection to the transactional interpretation hinges upon the fact that the transaction process depends crucially on the fixity of the absorbers “just sitting out there in the future, waiting to absorb” (2011: 182); one cannot presume that present events are unable to influence the future disposition of the absorbers. Maudlin offers a thought experiment to illustrate this objection. A radioactive source is constrained to emit a \(\beta\)-particle either to the left or to the right. To the right sits absorber A at a distance of 1 unit. Absorber B is also located to the right but at a distance of 2 units and is built on pivots so that it can be swung around to the left on command. A \(\beta\)-particle emitted at time \(t_{0}\) to the right will be absorbed by absorber A at time \(t_{1}\). If after time \(t_{1}\) the \(\beta\)-particle is not detected at absorber A, absorber B is quickly swung around to the left to detect the \(\beta\)-particle after time \(2t_{1}\).