>information cannot move faster than the speed of light >expect

>>8650928
predicting the future or controlling the future

>>8650928
We can assign probabilities to things that might happen based off what we already know

entanglement does, in fact, "move" faster than the speed of light

so there's that

>>8652159
"no"

>>8650928
A man goes in for a job interview. He is nervous.

He sees another man put coins into his pocket, and then go in ahead of him to interview. The first man says to himself, "the man with coins in his pocket will get the job".

Later on, the first man gets a callback and gets the job. He goes to buy a pop to celebrate, and discovers that he, in fact, had a pocket full of coins.

His statement was true, but his logic was unsound. Just because your prediction lines up with the end result doesn't mean you could be sure of your prediction beyond a shadow of reasonable doubt.

>>8652763
A man goes in for a job interview. He sees a man ahead of him to interview. The first man says to himself, "that man will get the job." He then leaves.
Later on, the first man gets a callback and gets the job, because the only other candidate didn't show up for the interview. The first man successfully and logically determined the future.

>>8652159
By move you mean transfer information (and technically kinetic energy as well).

Not being able to move faster than the speed of light is not a/the fundamental law, so it makes sense that there are some ways around it.

>>8652774
What if the man who would have gotten the job suffered a massive aneurism and died on the spot? Your guess being correct or highly likely doesn't mean you saw the future.

>>8650928
DELET THIS

NOTHING CAN MOVE FASTER THAN LIGHT

>>8652853
Except your mom on her way to my dick