It's based on a few things. Firstly, based on my personal model I expect Bitcoin to reach a minimum of $1,000,000 per coin by 2028, $10M by 2031, $100M by 2035 and so on until the mining network's growth slows down which isn't happening anytime soon. This is based on the 0.2046% average daily growth of the potential bottom seen outside of major macro events causing long term growth to be delayed as happened in 2020/2021.

As the mining network continues to grow over time, and the halving and difficulty adjustment continues to reprice the Bitcoin rewards relative to energy input, the value of Satoshi's will rise to be large enough to divide with little controversy. For without further division the network will gradually become unusable over time as the value rises.

Once this division occurs, the transaction fees can further drop and extend the block subsidy's use as the primary block reward. When we increase division on a regular interval automatically akin to the difficulty adjustment, then the final block subsidy will not be in 2140 on the 32nd halving but in 2268 on the 64th halving when the world will have been using Bitcoin for over 250 years.

But after only 50 years the world will see Bitcoin as a necessity and not a curiosity, and a block subsidy and transaction fees will gradually no longer be the primary reason to mine as simply securing the network becomes it's own reward. Therefore the transaction fees will never support the mining of new blocks, for we will instead see a transition from a world of mining blocks for the block subsidy to a world of mining blocks for the security benefit it provides.

Firstly I would like to state that there is great folly in comparing Bitcoin to the system it is replacing (fiat). Looking backwards at fiat distorts reality. I think we need to revisit the white paper and understand what Satoshi meant by “a peer to peer electronic cash system” from the perspective of physics.

By deconstructing the word choice Satoshi used, you arrive something along the lines of a “1 to 1 (equal to equal) energy cash system”. We know that 1 joule = 1 joule so this places us in a different domain than comparing to fiat where $1≠$1 with regards to time. The measure of value is quite important after all. We define mining by energy consumption (joules) so why not value?

If energy (joules) is the true peg to satoshis, how do we get there? Well entropy, temperature and Boltzmann is the very obvious link. So I would first ask, how do we define the temperature of a Bitcoin Block? The physical process in which computational energy is crystallized into immutable information. We are in the domain of energy transformations.

Looking at Boltzmann we have a dimensionality problem of how we relate Joules per Kelvin to Satoshis. Bitcoin reveals something fundamentally overlooked in physics; the relativity of Temperature defined by a known maximum supply of energy units. This would imply that the work done by Kelvin, Planck and Boltzmann is incomplete and needs adjustment (Bitcoin fixes quantum mechanics). Anything that touches temperature has an incorrect perspective and needs to be reexamined; all of our prior assumptions are wrong. Bitcoin is energy, thermodynamics proves this undeniably.

So, how does nature/universe maintain the conservation of energy without a peer to peer energy network? How do energy transformations maintain CoE?

Without going very indepth in the physics here, the existence of the universe and our ability to observe it reveals that we exist in an epoch in which a terminal subsidy of energy units (Kelvin) has been reached and our existence is solely sustained by transactional nature. Our existence is proof that Bitcoin can and will sustain itself solely fees by fees. This first assumption you made is fundamentally wrong and can be disproven with physics. Therefore we must really reconsider any change we want to make to the protocol.

If your physics is wrong, how can you even understand what you are looking at or comparing to? Are you certain we even understand what a Kelvin is? Are you certain peer to peer energy networks are not fundamental to reality and existence? Are you sure we even fully understand bitcoin and the changes we wish to make to it?

As far as moving the decimal, it’s relatively meaningless but it would be a way to adjust the perception of numbers we are looking at. But fiat has no place in this discussion. Some food for thought.

#Bitcoin #Physics

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Analysis of Bitcoin and its relation to energy is such an interesting field that is developing alongside the network.

Bitcoin fundamentally changes how humanity interacts with energy and time forever, and our understanding of this change is only just beginning.

Fiat is probably as far from a perfect measuring stick as one could get, but as it's currently the unit of account globally I feel it can be useful as a simple substitute for energy measurement and analysis of network growth trends until we start measuring energy more directly with joules or other.

Appreciate the response, I look forward to discussions like this becoming more common and in depth as adoption and understanding of Bitcoin grows.

Thank you, by no means do I want to shoot your thoughts down, but I don’t think we truly perceive how deep fiat corrupts our understanding and perception of Bitcoin. The space is stuck in the understanding as just money/currency/digital gold. It’s way more and fiat digs deep in our psyche.

To say I know anything/everything is far from the truth, but I am pulling on the thread of Bitcoin as far as I can go, and to me it’s obvious the rabbit hole is quite deeper; like we’re only in the 1st inning in our understanding of Bitcoin.

I truly believe Bitcoin fixes quantum mechanics and our physical models of reality at the deepest of levels; starting with temperature. All of cosmology, big bang, quantum mechanics, general relativity is up for a complete reinterpretation through the new definition of temperature that Bitcoin provides us. Spacetime as well; it’s likely timespace in my opinion.

If you think disrupting the money is crazy, wait until it disrupts all of reality. It’s fundamentally changing us and the structure of reality itself. This has me both and excited and fearful of what I may be beginning to uncover. Bitcoin is bigger than me and could use all of the help I could get.

I think we are all wrong about Bitcoin; even the maximalists. A very inconvenient truth requiring yet another ego death of as all.

If anything I am saying holds any weight at all, then do we really understand Bitcoin and what we are building on top of? This idea would flip the entire space on its head. Every change to the protocol has a much deeper meaning and it’s important to have all perspectives. What if we are wrong?

Bitcoin being acknowledged as THE quantum computer is only the beginning. I think things are about to get crazy; especially when there is no second best.