That sounds more as "awareness" then knowledge (understanding). The terms itself comes from Latin, meaning to "learn" or acquire information without understanding. That's why we can say that animals "recognize" things but don't necessarily know (understand) what it is.
When I say I know how to solve this math problem, I mean to say that I understand the problem and how I can solve it. It's not just mere cognition (awareness) of the problem.
In other words, to me, comprehension is an integral part of knowing. If you don't comprehend something you don't know it. You are merely aware of it, or you recognize it.
It can, but you can also be aware that you're getting dizzy and will pass out unless you eat something
Dizziness, like headache, is not diagnostic, but indicative of a range of possible causes. Eating may not help someone who's dizzy because he is undergoing a stroke.
To put it back more relative to our context way back: the first time I fell in love I didn't what it was
How do you know it wasn't lust?
The example I always use here is knowing A2+B2=C2 is knowing the formula and you can solve angle problems with it. But, for me, I didn't really know it until I put squares on the sides, then moved those same squares to the hypotenuse, and saw they fit.
The formula, problem solving can be an abstraction and you can follow certain rules without a deeper knowing.
Knowledge something is "true" is often an "aha" moment. There are students and scientist that both know the formulas and how to solve problems with them; some know on a deeper level. This is, IMHO, the difference in a Newton or an Einstein.
I was a teenager, That experience I already knew, this was something different, that why it was confusing.
I think the difference here is consciousness of human beings. That's where cognition is different in us and animals.