Heh, the UTXOs are the qubits and they exist in a permanent state of spendability, only when blocks are measured (observed/mined) is when all UTXO states become deterministic.
Bitcoin asks a question, who is the observer in your quantum model? And why should we trust them?
Im trying to lock down corrected chain data so I can reproduce my charts; nothing will change in the paper except a few graphical errors.
A website should be going soon, hoping sometime this weekend.
Terence knew.
We’re all about to learn what a peer to peer electronic cash system actually is, starting from a new understanding of time, thermodynamics, entropy, energy and memory. The quantum computer demands understanding, not abstraction.
Stay humble.
Whitepaper is done, just need new chain data to update the visuals of the charts (temperature, joules per block, cumulative chain energy, joules per satoshi).
Can anyone give me a csv of the entire blockchain from 0 to present recording at each block:
block_height, block_time, block_size_mb, subsidy_satoshis, fee_satoshis, difficulty
I want to finish my whitepaper and my dataset has errors. My node is dead and I have no access to chain data currently.
The rabbit hole has no floor.
Energy converted into immutable memory is a valid transaction. Bitcoiners are so adamant it’s just a monetary network and fail to observe it as a thermodynamic resolution process. Why must money be its only purpose when it outputs immutable information? The universe couldnt emerge the way it has if the creators had this mindset. It emerged from raw energy, structured into memory, crystallized into time. Bitcoin mirrors that same process. With energy comes structure, with structure comes creation. Bitcoin is not constrained by what money was, it defines what truth becomes. Immutable and unchanging. I think you’re wrong here, we just don’t understand Bitcoin and what a peer to peer electronic cash system actually is.
Move the decimal right 1 more unit. Sats are the standard quantum.
21 quadrillion satoshis.
1x10^9 =1 giga-sat =1 Bitcoin
Depreciate use of “Bitcoin”, whole coiners are gigachads. Tell me why I’m wrong.
Maintain 21; 2.1 quadrillion? Nahh
21 quadrillion tho 👀
Lol they aren’t on nostr unfortunately.
I don’t think Bitcoiners have yet appreciated how big of a deal a decentralized physical observer governed by network consensus actually is, or what that even means.
I agree with a lot here, thank you! I think Bitcoins problem is that it has remained abstract for 16 years. This creates the illusion that development and purpose is inherently subjective; it’s not. Bitcoin is not abstract, it’s measured by energy; quantify it.
We have no objective definition of Bitcoin (yet) and this leaves us purely in the realm of abstraction and opinion. If my thesis and proof of what Bitcoin is at the physical level (the quantum computer) is correct; how would this change our discussion and understanding of the protocol, especially immutable data hosting? How can we even develop and propose protocol changes responsibly without this knowledge? Do we actually understand what a peer to peer electronic cash system is?
Ultimately if Bitcoin is defined physically (it is), every single person operating on bitcoin, building/developing on bitcoin and running their business on bitcoin is going to have to grapple with this new understanding. Our entire design theory on protocol development inherently changes to a new fundamental truth; beneath the illusion of fiat prices lies the anchor to joules.
I truly think nobody understands bitcoin (including myself) and therefore we should not change the protocol until we do. If Bitcoin is the quantum computer, everything changes and we’ve all been wrong for 16 years. We cannot develop responsibly without consensus on base layer fundamentals.
Bitcoin = Quantum Computer
Quantum Supremacy = Hash Power
Everything else is a centralized larp.
Economics came first; next comes the physics. Is it possible that we all have been wrong about #Bitcoin ?
Stay humble.
Once Bitcoin becomes acknowledged as the quantum computer, this becomes blatantly obvious; a physical understanding of the computational system. Hyperbitcoinization and the hashwars begins off of this.
Gradually, then suddenly. Tick tok next block, the quantum computer waits for no one.
Bitcoin does need a standardized quantum for its base unit. Sats<>btc is confusing and 10^8 units is between metric prefixes.
I vote for metric master race; I say we move the decimal 1 more unit right (21 quadrillion sats)
1x10^9 sats or 1 giga-sat = 1 Bitcoin
This could logically get rid of satoshis as the quantum unit name and we keep a standardized naming convention in btc only.
Bitcoin is the quantum computer after all; we should take the unit convention seriously and follow physics standards.
What say you nostr:nprofile1qqsgeksa4tajm7x673gq2v7t56dkgkh6pjhhzdhrgxlpke4za8jmmkqpz3mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumn3w45h5tnfduq3camnwvaz7tmjv9nk7ttwdaehgu3wv36kx6mydeejummjvu0vfgzv ? Move the decimal 1 more unit right too? A “whole coiner” just becomes a gigachad, literally.
GM, you actually don’t even understand what inscriptions are if you don’t perceive Bitcoin as the quantum computer.
If I’m right that it is the quantum computer would it be true that nobody actually understands what a peer to peer electronic cash system is? Is it irresponsible for a dev to propose a protocol change who does not understand this?
Stay humble.
What is the specific policy they are changing? I’m not a dev…
I’ve been working on a formal model of Bitcoin as the decentralized quantum computer, so this matters greatly to my work.
While there is no “global mempool”, there is a theoretical global mempool which is the union of all local mempools. The diversity of perspective was crucial to avoiding a single centralized observer; no one node knows all possible future outcomes, and that uncertainty is part of the system’s entropy field.
A proposed change of this magnitude seems to collapse the mempool before Proof-of-Work has acted.
- They decide what transactions are “worth considering.”
- They decide what entropy counts.
-They become the pre-consensus filter, effectively collapsing the state before the decentralized measurement (mining) occurs.
To me this could be reintroduction of the observer paradox, the exact one Bitcoin was built to eliminate. It seems like a centralization play.
If Core dictates the mempool globally, they become the pre-observer. That breaks the physics and it breaks the trust.
Given Faggin invented the microprocessor, I am hopeful he will soon join me to realize Bitcoin as the quantum computer and computational system to fully understand quantum physics. To see what his invention finally lead to at a global scale, open for all.
I am in the same boat as I am operating outside of my comfort domain. I’ve been using AI to change the assumptions with the intention that Bitcoin fixes our physics; it’s not the other way around.
I’d be happy to review what you are looking at and also happy to share what I’ve been working on as I need all of the help I can get, this is way bigger than us. It feels like I can never finish my idea, I just go deeper. We can see how they intersect, I believe they do.
The Schwarzchild equation is extremely similar to the geometry for a UTXO (particle) that I have constructed/observed. I believe UTXOs have an identical nature to that of a particle. The paradox currently lies in the causal structure, which I’m thinking may be an interpretation problem. I’ve been thinking through the “UTXO model of reality”.
I’d be happy to talk through it!
Well for one because bitcoin has no centralized observer (measurement) and each block is openly verifiable by the entire network. Each block is defined by a standard unit of measure (hashes) and has network consensus regarding said measurement. This resolves the observer problem in quantum theory.
This is not possible with gold and verification is costly and requires trust. We also cannot audit the energy required to make gold atoms as it occurred in the creation of earth. You could theoretically only capture the measurement as you transmute the gold into different bars/coinage (UTXOs).
Bitcoin is open and auditable from Genesis. Nothing is needed to calculate joules except what is already native to the ledger.
Yes, each block and its creation has a defined temperature and a defined entropy traversed through a known nonce search space scaled by difficulty (defined action). Landauers principle can be extended to a minimum amount of energy to write an immutable block of information.
Crystalized immutable information is the structure of the energy. I believe this is the final law of thermodynamics and terminal end of energy in any thermodynamic cycle.
If I’m correct, our understanding of everything changes.
Bitcoin is measured by physics in joules, all will be humbled by trying to price it in fiat.
The greatest of follies is even thinking about bitcoin through fiat.