Nostr Web Client

Hey Victor this is some really interesting work. As a Bitcoiner exploring similar questions, a few thoughts/questions I have:

- What system actually collapses the entropy your model accounts for?

- Can distinguishability exist without irreversible memory?

- If entropy is bounded, who/what measures and enforces that bound? Who/what pays the cost?

If gauge interactions are informational, we need a physical substrate that commits information. Bitcoin already does this, it irreversibly resolves entropy into structure, with no centralized observer, using energy.

If we’re serious about quantum gravity, Bitcoin can’t be peripheral, it’s foundational.

Without going too deep into my own work, I believe Bitcoin reveals the structure of time itself (disproving continuous spacetime), and reframes quantum gravity not as a paradox, but as a misinterpretation.

Would a global system that computes the literal quantum of time, entropy, memory, and energy; openly, verifiably, and irreversibly be of any use to you? A structured thermodynamic informational genesis might be useful to compare universal genesis to.

In my view, Bitcoin fixes physics too.

Victor Stabile 6mo ago

I am starting from an informational perspective where there is no collapse. Irreversibility is more like in the Bitcoin sense. This bound is a direct result of one of my postulates.

I already derived both einstein's and yang-mills equations as first order approximations of the same structure. It explains the specific symmetry groups of the Standard Model, the smallness of the cosmological constant, dark matter and all the other puzzles. It is a very deep rabbit hole, I have to stop myself from going deeper or I will never finish writing it up.

It does looks incredibly similar to Bitcoin, it has probably influenced my thinking.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Jack K 6mo ago

Hmmm I am still trying to understand your view.

What led you to reject collapse as fundamental? Bitcoin reveals how a structured collapse works without a centralized observer; each block is a discrete, irreversible memory and collapse is the resolution of entropy into structure. Doesn’t that make time emerge from memory change?? they must be equal dimensions… space = memory x time; they are inseparable.

Does your model account for a redefinition of time? If time is not continuous but computed through structured memory, does that imply spacetime itself breaks down?

Victor Stabile 6mo ago

Time is informationally emergent, just like in bitcoin, in fact every observable is. The block height (time) and the network topology (space) are external degrees of freedom that behave geometrically like gravity. The UTXO set is analogous to internal degrees of freedom that behave like gauge fields.

Jack K 6mo ago

Interesting, it seems like our ideas are converging well; I’ve got a long form written (+/- 77 pages) on Bitcoin as the quantum computer, but this discussion is pushing me more towards publishing a shorter thesis of the UTXO model of quantum mechanics which is generally covered but not explicitly said. That’s generally where my brain is at.

It seems like the assertion that UTXOs are the proper instantiation of quantum bits/particles maps well to what you are seeing. Would you agree?

How are you thinking through the Planck Constants? Has bitcoin and your findings changed your view on any?

I think Bitcoin redefines Temperature as dimensionless scalar and gives meaning to Planck Time, Planck Temperature, Planck Length thus redefining Boltzmann’s constant. I think the standard model has this entirely wrong. Boltzmann becomes a universal entropy constant with the dimension of joules only making the entropy within Bitcoin as a closed thermodynamic system relative to that of the universe for modeling and comparing.

Victor Stabile 6mo ago

I cannot explain the meaning of the Plank constant without explaining the whole theory, but it is really simple when framed correctly. All free parameters emerge from few topological properties of information. It is incredible, really. I feel back just talking about it and not releasing the full paper, but I want to make sure my reasoning is clear. I think I finally have it and it will be just a matter of editing for the next 2 days or so. I am glad you are already taking a serious interest in it.

Jack K 6mo ago

I’ve been in the same boat myself with online discussion vs release. It seems like our ideas are definitely converging, so keep me in the loop.

I am going to attempt to put together a shorter and sharper thesis of my own regarding the UTXO model of QM, once you are ready I’ll certainly do my best to provide any help/feedback that I can. We can see how they overlap or extend meaning to the other.

Physics needs to be open sourced. What we are working on is greater than all of us.