Possibilities are Potentially Now

:: vi_spex said, "if i predict something with 100 percent accuracy i stil didnt know" :: vi_spex said, "now=reality loop 1 second or less=personal physical experience" I know, I know... future=imaginary=false, now=know=true. Essentially, the future doesn't exist ("now") so it is false. BUT, the fact remains that one CAN predict the future and DOES act upon that prediction as if it was true. prediction = imagination = false prediction = imagination = potentially now "Potentially Now" means that it might become now. It doesn't mean that it is true, but it is possible that now can match that prediction of the future. This is founded in the passage of time, but you cannot deny that. You have defined "now" as a "1-second loop", which infers that you recognize the passage of time. If you are standing on the ledge of a four-story building, you would likely not step off the building. Why is that? You personal experience of now has never included a four-story fall onto hard ground below, so the consequences of stepping off the building must be imagined, which is false (future=false). However, your actions will be affected by your belief, even though you deem it as false, or "be lie". You have beliefs, even if they are false, your actions are influence by them AS IF they were true. They are "potentially true". belief = prediction = future = false = potentially now :: vi_spex said, "only the time of now is true, now is matter." But your actions are influence by information, which is false. If a train is speeding towards you, you will get off of the train tracks because you predict that you will be struck if you do not move. You are acting under the assumption that your prediction will become now. If you did not act upon your beliefs (potentially now), then you would have no reason to avoid coming danger and would not be around to respond to this. :: vi_spex said, "an optical illusion dosnt make my eyes false, neither does it make me blind, i am certain when i see an optical illusion" I didn't say that. So, your physical experience defines reality. By that logic, you must have perfect vision. To admit otherwise would be admitting that you are not seeing everything correctly, which means that there is more to reality than what you see or that you are seeing it differently, which implies that there is more to reality than your perception. Do you follow that? Have you ever heard of "Transitive Relation"? If A = B, and B = C, then A = C [1]? I believe this logic applies here. A: Reality B: Physical Experience of Now C: Sensory Perception reality = physical experience of now (= true) physical experience of now = sensory perception (= true) sensory perception = reality (= true) If you sensory perception is not perfect, then it is not always true. This would mean that your sensory perception does not always equal your physical experience of now. This would then mean that your sensory perception not does always equal reality. This implies that your are not seeing reality perfectly, which means that there is more to reality than what you sense. :: vi_spex said, "i dont have to expect that i will reach the glass of water to reach for it, i see the glass and take it" What if you were mistakenly looking at a reflection in a mirror and didn't realize it (it can happen)? You "know" that the glass is there (physical experience of now) but when you reach to grab it, you hit the mirror, instead. This indicates that your physical experience of now was wrong. :: vi_spex said, "i dont believe you will provide further argument, you might not, i dont know, i know my experience of now" My point is that you acted AS IF you knew. Why else would you have bothered to respond? Can you give me a reason? [1] Wikipedia: Transitive Relation - http://en.wikipedia.org...