Layperson's read but the paper seems to say "this is weird we were accurate than should be possible" combined with "causal order wouldn't make sense here"
Much less "we found time travel" and more "that was weird maybe it was time travel".
Also note that to my knowledge there is no form of talking about entanglement that involves time before entanglement or any meaningful manipulation of the entangled particle.
Thus even if you could talk backwards in time with entangled particle it is unlikely to make a meaningful difference at distances measured less than how far light travels in that time.
Much less "we found time travel" and more "that was weird maybe it was time travel".
Also note that to my knowledge there is no form of talking about entanglement that involves time before entanglement or any meaningful manipulation of the entangled particle.
Thus even if you could talk backwards in time with entangled particle it is unlikely to make a meaningful difference at distances measured less than how far light travels in that time.