[@Bishop]

I can really appreciate that theory. If you (the other readers) understand what Bishop said, jump down below the line. If you found it harder to understand (As I once did, no shame there) continue reading. If you don't care about all this sciencey mumbo-jumbo, jump to the very last line.

 First, you must understand what a frame of reference is. A frame of reference is basically your "view" on a perceived event—I'm attempting to make this simple, bear with me. One of the best examples of this I've seen is as follows:

[quote=IsaacPhysics(dot)org on, Concepts, Frames of Reference]
Imagine you threw and caught a ball while you were on a train moving at a constant velocity past a station. To you, the ball appears to simply travel vertically up and then down under the influence of gravity. However, to an observer standing on the station platform the ball would appear to travel in a parabola, with a constant horizontal component of velocity equal to the velocity of the train.

The different observations occur because the two observers are in different frames of reference. A frame of reference is a set of coordinates that can be used to determine positions and velocities of objects in that frame; different frames of reference move relative to one another.[/quote]
[hr][hr]

Now, taking that forward. We cannot assign a frame of reference to light, and we cannot obtain an observation at the speed of light: Therefore, it's hard to prove that light doesn't actually experience time. If we cannot measure if light exists outside of time, then I assume we could not influence light that exists outside of time and manipulate it into a previous state.

To be fair, you did say that "..researchers argued.." which implies that this is in fact a speculation. Also, to be fair, this is a made up roleplay in a made up world that's going to be chalked full of (lazy?) quasi-science. As much as I really do like you're theory, it's not the explanation I have.

[quote=Late night thoughts with Aeon]
Fun thought: If light indeed does not experience time, would the photon then not experience anything? From it's point of view, it's never emitted, never absorbed, and never travels anywhere because it never experiences time. It's also this later thought which leads me to find the concept of "previous lives" hard to believe. 

Much like the body sleeps at night, during that period where you have no memory, you did not experience time through your own frame of refernce: Therefore, in a previous life you could not remember, you do not have a frame of reference, and it never happened until you remember it. If you cannot remember it, how do you prove it happened at all?[/quote]

Unfortunately, I do not think the story I have concocted is nearly that interesting, but perhaps I am too harsh a critic.