I’m not disputing phenomena. What I’m saying is that Bitcoin falsifies the models those phenomena are embedded in, not the observations themselves.
You’ve sidestepped my point: divide a Bitcoin block into a smaller unit of time. You can’t. There is no sub-block temporal state that is valid, verifiable, or meaningful. The block is an atomic temporal object. If you don’t understand the object, you don’t understand what it implies for any theory built on time.
The formalism assumes continuous time (infinitely divisible) to define evolution, superposition, and coherence. Bitcoin shows that a real, working system of irreversible state change requires discrete time. That doesn’t make interference disappear, it means the mathematics describing it is an approximation, not fundamental.
So I’ll reassert that Bitcoin falsifies the assumption that reality needs continuous time to be explained.
Bam. There it is. 👊
More will understand this as will be required in the (near) future.
Thx Jack….
Time is money they say😂
Bitcoin makes that literal. Just observe Bitcoin if you want to understand the object of time.
Thread collapsed
Thread collapsed
"So I’ll reassert that Bitcoin falsifies the assumption that reality needs continuous time to be explained."
LOL wut...? Bitcoin doesn't "falsify" anything about the nature of reality. It's not some CERN experiment. It's a serialized data structure. Of course it can be "subdivided", even at the abstraction level, into smaller units of data.
That doesn't prove anything about the nature of QM.
That's like saying that because a comic book comes out every month, as a distinct and atomic structure (at the level of the comic-book abstraction), therefore that proves that continuous time is not a necessary part of reality.
I suppose if you're only confining your context to the serialization of a comic book, then sure. But that hasn't proven anything about quantum processes occurring at ~10^8 times smaller length and time scales.
Thread collapsed
I’m sorry if you don’t think a bounded entropy field becoming a quantized object of time through proof-of-work tells us anything important about reality. You cannot subdivide the temporal state transition the data represents.
If you’re comfortable continuing to double-spend your beliefs, that’s your choice. You don’t get to believe in both centralized quantum computing and Bitcoin. They rest on incompatible definitions about time, finality, and computation. Eventually, time will force a reconciliation and you don’t get to pick both sides.
"bounded entropy field becoming a quantized object of time through proof-of-work tells us anything important about reality. You cannot subdivide the temporal state transition the data represents."
This is pseudo-scientific word salad. You could say the exact same thing about eating a ham sandwich.
You clearly don’t grasp what a difficulty-scaled 32-bit nonce space even is, let alone what it means for computation or information theory. If you can’t relate mining to a bounded entropy search, then of course anything about quantized state transitions is a word salad to you.
If you can’t understand a probabilistic search over a finite space and the collapse it into a single verifiable state, you cant possible connect that process to entropy, nor do you understand the object you’re trying to dismiss.
At this point, I’m not arguing with a counterposition, I’m just explaining the process of Bitcoin to someone who doesn’t understand it at the level necessary to engage.
Thread collapsed
Thread collapsed
Thread collapsed
Thread collapsed
