future

You can't be friends with yesterday and tomorrow at the same time.

Future is an empty paper, but not absolutely empty; the shadows of the drawings of the past is there, on the paper!

That's one benefit of travelling to your own future, and making the trip part of your past.

Indeed, life is full of tests. You don__ know what they are, so you must treat everything in life with the same care you would bring to a test on which your future rests. I realize that the most important test of all, in my quest, and in every bird__ quest, is the test to be the master of fate.

History tells Us It__ Possible".

In 20 or 30 years, you'll be able to hold in your hand as much computing knowledge as exists now in the whole city, or even the whole world.

None of These Will Come Easy.

YOU are YOU! Know YOU can! YOU must not be afraid because God has a prosperous future plan for YOU! YOU got to know YOU! Guess who you are? YOU are a blessing to all others especially me!

Now comes the reign of iron _ and cased sloops are to take the place of wooden ships.

A single obscure decision of prophecy, perhaps the choice of one word over another, could change the entire aspect of the future. He tells us "The vision of time is broad, but when you pass through it, time becomes a narrow door.

Every broken heart has one time or another asked, "What is important to me now?

You can't know what it is like for us now--you will always be one step behind.Be thankful for that.You can't know what it was like for us then--you will always be one step ahead.Be thankful for that, too.

People are so busy polishing their past, that they forget to paint their future.

As an empiricist I continue to think of the conceptual scheme of science as a tool, ultimately, for predicting future experience in the light of past experience. Physical objects are conceptually imported into the situation as convenient intermediaries-not by definition in terms of experience, but simply as irreducible posits comparable, epistemologically, to the gods of Homer. For my part I do, qua lay physicist, believe in physical objects and not in Homer's gods; and I consider it a scientific error to believe otherwise. But in point of epistemological footing the physical objects and the gods differ only in degree and not in kind. Both sorts of entities enter our conception only as cultural posits. The myth of physical objects is epistemologically superior to most in that it has proved more efficacious than other myths as a device for working a manageable structure into the flux of experience.

Instead of writing backwards over what had happened, giving structure and meaning to his story, he wrote forwards, slipping into troubling futures.

... truth, whose mother is history, who is the rival of time, depository of deeds, witness of the past, example and lesson to the present, and warning to the future.

Just when the butterfly thought the world was over, it became a butterfly.

Lastly, and doubtless always, but particularly at the end of the last century, certain scholars considered that since the appearances on our scale were finally the only important ones for us, there was no point in seeking what might exist in an inaccessible domain. I find it very difficult to understand this point of view since what is inaccessible today may become accessible tomorrow (as has happened by the invention of the microscope), and also because coherent assumptions on what is still invisible may increase our understanding of the visible.