If a then b. Omniscience, full knowledge of now.
I don't follow. Unless you're talking impossibility.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
If a then b. Omniscience, full knowledge of now.
I don't follow. Unless you're talking impossibility.
If a then b is a prediction.
Prediction is not knowledge.
Something known to be inevitable would be knowledge of the future. If a, the current state, then 'b', the future state. Supposing you could test it, the math will come out the same every time, cause math doesnt lie.
Which is why complete knowledge of the current state, the now, must be a known. If all of now is a known the inevitable would also be known because the variables would be taken into account giving a 100% accurate prediction.Predictions carry no inevitability, because all the variables cannot be determined.
Why is that? In theory, if it exists it is knowable, but obviously humans are rather limited in that respect.The nature of knowledge makes it not possible.
Which is why complete knowledge of the current state, the now, must be a known. If all of now is a known the inevitable would also be known because the variables would be taken into account giving a 100% accurate prediction.
I personally can't find myself to ever be in with the parallel universe idea.
Because of locality.Why is that? In theory, if it exists it is knowable, but obviously humans are rather limited in that respect.
I don't think anything is really random, we just haven't figured out the space-time variables. With every point in space-time a particle can be, it would have a reason for being there. A particle gets influenced by the macro world and then violates space-time to make it seem random but the experiments are influencing the outcomes. That's why people think the particles can time travel when they try and "trick" the particles to not collapse.This assumes that randomness doesn't exist.
That's it in a nutshell. What you "knew" wasn't true: you didn't really know the future at all. The future isn't changeable. Que Sera, Sera.If, hypothetically, you can know an event in your future, would this allow you to change your future? If so, was it an incorrect future and thus you never knew it in the first place?