
To predict the future, the brain uses two clocks - ClarendonDrive
https://news.berkeley.edu/2018/11/19/brainclocks/
======
zbobet2012
Anyone who has done a "reaction based sport" at a moderate to high level can
feel this I think. Whether it's driving quickly, or skiing a mogul line at
pace, you seem not only to exist in the moment, but in two moments. One
seconds ahead of where you are now and one coordinating your current actions.

~~~
WalterSear
Music, performance, too.

------
bra-ket
Also see publications by Richard Ivry lab on time perception:
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?cmd=search&term=Ivry+RB%...](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?cmd=search&term=Ivry+RB%5Bau%5D&dispmax=50)

------
taxicabjesus
The article is about "anticipation", which is not exactly "future predicting".
I'm disappointed, but science does not have a mechanistic explanation for
future-seeing, and therefore has no respect for those who have an ability to
"predict" very far beyond the predictable future - [2], perhaps.

One of my passengers once said something about a "psychic" having told
[him/her] something-or-other. I huffed, delivered a short reply about humans'
ability to see the future, then resumed my standard talk. If I was good at
future-seeing, I would have tried to avoid what was to come to pass on account
of _that_ passenger.

About three years ago I had the sense, "this 'project' is going to take about
3 years..." I'd say I was approximately correct, but the whole time I've been
thinking it'd be finished with the next step.

It's said that Abraham Lincoln was greatly interested in the predictive power
of dreams. He may [0] (or may not [1]) have foreseen his own death in a dream.
He was bummed out, but wasn't able to adequately interpret his dream so as to
avert his own assassination.

[0]
[https://rogerjnorton.com/Lincoln46.html](https://rogerjnorton.com/Lincoln46.html)
[1] [https://www.history.com/news/did-abraham-lincoln-predict-
his...](https://www.history.com/news/did-abraham-lincoln-predict-his-own-
death) (autoplay video)

[2] "Jules Verne: The Sci-Fi Author Who Predicted the Future" \-
[https://thehustle.co/jules-verne-the-sci-fi-author-who-
predi...](https://thehustle.co/jules-verne-the-sci-fi-author-who-predicted-
the-future) \- advice at the end, "How you can see the future", is quite
solid.

Discussion questions:

1\. Have you ever had a dream that was predictive of the future?

2\. Have you ever "foreseen" what came to pass? Or maybe you didn't like what
was to come, decided that you wanted something else, and thereby deliberately
changed your own future?

3\. Everyone uses 'predicting' all the time for evaluating which path to take.
Some people are better at this than others (e.g. Jeff Bezos 'foresaw' the
transformative power of the internet).

When did you pick correctly, even if it was a long shot? What about times that
you picked incorrectly, maybe even though it was the 'safe' choice? Have you
had a gut feeling that the long shot was actually a better bet, but you
ignored your gut feeling?

~~~
chronolitus
Those who start stock trading, or gambling, quickly learn (the hard way) to
differentiate between the brain's delusion of prediction, and the cold hard
truth of statistics, randomness, and probability.

But if one is indeed right about their intuitions/senses/dreams containing
some truth beyond the computable bayesian prior probability, they would
definitely stand to make quite a sum on the stock market.

What particularly bothers me is that, say that the brain had somehow managed
to develop a science-defying future-prediction ability, why on earth would it
not develop and explicitly use that ability rather than subtly injecting vague
clues in dreams, or say raising vague feelings in one direction or other? In a
darwinian context, wasting such effort and valuable computation is rather
atypical.

And if it did indeed somehow inject this future-prediction in its subconscious
estimates for likelihoods, we would be seeing humans doing things which defy
the accepted laws of knowable randomness, like predicting coin outcomes with
better than 50% probability (similar, longer-timespan experiments could
trivially be devised ).

