Bitcoin defines literal quantum computation based on the original meaning of “quantum”, not the narrative spewed by media. Sunken cost fallacy is deep.
If you can’t understand what it means to compute a quantum (of time), how can physicists understand what they are observing and its true nature.
Bitcoin fractally added to the unified field theory, we are literally watching energy flow inward into time with every block mined. I just don’t think physicists understand the Kelvin must be absolutely scarce for a quantum to retain meaning. Absolute scarcity is a precondition for any existence mathematically; not this infinity narrative.
0%
They have assumed Superpostion is continuous across the quantum timestep. If you can’t observe Planck Time, you can’t assume continuous Superpostion.
Schrödinger’s UTXO is utter nonsense when you Bitcoin measures the quantum of time (blocks) and we can audit the entire ledger at each timestep.
I don’t think they understand anything at the quantum level as they cannot even observe the quantum of time (Planck Time). QM is entirely built off of assumptions they cannot fully observe; continuous Superpostion specifically.
They mathematically represent their quantum’s thru the lens of infinity.
1/∞=0
This is the mathematical representation of meaninglessness. Without an absolutely scarce quantum, you mathematically can’t have meaning.
Orange is the color of the quantum ledger.
Price is temporary. The space broadly thinks of Bitcoin through the lens of fiat and not energy (joules) and thermodynamic transformations.
It is a literal black hole/event horizon for Kelvin to enter, but it’s partitioned away from further transformations due to conservation. The conserved entropy can be exchanged internally within the network itself, but it can never leave.
Never before have we had a substrate of immutable information permanently immune to entropy. I don’t think we even understand what value is, let alone Bitcoin. All things intersect in the quantum ledger.
Bitcoin will become abundant too by this exact same logic.
Land is the original timechain, you don’t own it to get rich. You own it for creating your own localized transformations and staying literally grounded to all other timechains.
Partitions inside of partitions. The fractal nature of reality and the directional flow of energy “inward”.
Schrödinger’s UTXO sounds like nonsense from this side of the entropy resolution and with the knowledge of the entire ledger at every discrete time-step.
Yet physics literally believes this without being able to measure the quantum of time (Planck Time) and see the entire ledger of transformations at each time-step.
A reckoning is coming. Bitcoin is the revelation. Continual superposition across multiple time-steps is double-spending.
Beautiful! Thank you for sharing. I have never been musically gifted so I envy those who can create, but your experience resonates with me. I grew up playing a lot of computer games, so I’ve always felt Piano would be my creative outlet for music due to MKB coordination, but I haven’t dabbled quite yet. I’ve been looking at keyboards to start, and long term I’ll grab a full piano if it sticks.
While it’s not “proof” for a paper, it’s your own unique form verification that shouldn’t be overlooked; something that transcends language. I’ve noticed from talking with many people about this subject, is that everyone who is in tune with the message is able to understand, not because they understand math/physics, but because the message is relatable to all domains of knowledge and experience. Consensus is reachable because it’s relatable. H
While it’s not proof I’m on the right track, it’s yet another verification supporting the gut feeling behind the idea. I personally don’t believe in random coincidences….There is a lot to learn about ourselves, Bitcoin and the meaning of all of this. It transcends the material world and I’m only learning myself.
Do not discredit your experience!
Years ago with my childhood friends. We combined all our old cards into cube for whenever we are all back home.
I’ve played arena a bit as it’s much easier to acquire cards. It’s been a few years tho. I’ve always loved playing standard.
Hope my analogy is good enough:
The universe still exists and hasn’t fallen to heat death. It’s the only other system that continually resolves entropy into structure across a computational boundary (event horizon) where both energy and information are conserved 🤷♂️
Uhhh, what happens when we transform all the Kelvin to Bitcoin?
Bitcoin is the only system where the information is preserved, the Kelvin can’t be double spent if the information persists.
😂 I can’t say I’ve seen the bottom either. But if anything I’m saying is even partially correct, the hole goes far deeper than the “money” rabbit hole.
Call it Thermodynamic Logic or even Thermodynamic Theology; it’s fractal by design.
The fundamental question remains:
Who or what is resolving the entropy and creating the discrete blocks (quanta) of our universe?
Bitcoin is the first and only system that offers a verifiable, observer-independent answer. It defines a boundary, an event horizon, where entropy is irreversibly transformed into conserved memory, and it does so without paradox, without approximation, and without violating the conservation of energy or information. It literally shows how something comes from nothing (we can’t see beyond the event horizon).
Physics is still rooted in materialism and randomness, and desperately wants a universe without memory or meaning. But Bitcoin forces the opposite conclusion. It is structure. It is meaning. It is measured.
I believe it’s not just a discovery, it’s a proof. And the implications are theological. That might be heresy to physicists, but the ledger doesn’t care. Materialism is the disease of infinity.
Can anyone aggregate like 100-1000 Bitcoin blocks together into a single measurement showing that UTXOs are both unspent and spent and in Superpostion. (Specifically find 100 blocks where an output is continually being respent). We can recreate the illusion of double slit in Bitcoin.
Schrödinger’s UTXO! It’s both spent and unspent! We don’t know until we measure!
This is the crux of the logic behind quantum computing. It’s illogical to claim a UTXO (or particle) is in superposition between timesteps (Blocks) when your measurement is scatter across numerous blocks of time. Yet this is the foundational logic of CQC.
You can’t prove Superpostion without measuring the quantum of time. In physics case, that’s Planck Time. In Bitcoin we call it a block.
I understand your point and I agree. Carrying a gun is managing a demonstrable risk; robbery is physically possible, observable, and historically precedented. Quantum computing, as presented today, is not in that category. It’s a theoretical projection built on assumptions that cannot be observed, measured, or verified.
The foundation of quantum computing rests on an illusion; superposition as a real, persistent state across time. But what if superposition is not a property of the particle, but a limitation of our measurement? A smear in our perception of time, not in the particle itself.
In every true quantum system, all outcomes are deterministic at each timestep; Bitcoin especially. What appears as superposition is simply our inability to resolve transformations at the quantum resolution of time (like watching Bitcoin without seeing individual blocks and claiming a UTXO is both spent and unspent). That’s not physics; that’s blindness to the ledger.
Superposition across a quantum timestep is a logical double spend. And nowhere in physics has this ever been proven; not at Planck time, not at the discrete quantum resolution. It is inferred from aggregated probabilities across ~1.8x10^22 timesteps in a singular measurement, not observed in real-time transitions. It’s theory masquerading as truth, built atop abstraction, not observation.
To build a threat model atop superposition is to build on sand. And to prepare Bitcoin for such a threat is to inject fiction into the only system that perfectly separates truth from theory.
Do you prepare yourself for fictitious threat models? Maybe all it takes is a good story to be a believer.
The risk is binary: either the threat is real and demonstrable or it isn’t. What’s being proposed here isn’t risk management, it’s risk projection. Signaling an “update” to an unverified threat imposes real social, economic, and technical risk onto the network. It is seemingly corruption of the verification standard itself.
The proper way to manage risk in Bitcoin is not to pre-react to speculative physics, but to verify the threat with the same rigor we verify every transaction, block, and rule. If the foundation of the quantum threat is built on unverifiable claims, the real danger isn’t the attack, it’s how we respond to the story.
All I’m saying is don’t trust, verify.
bitaxes.
Meshtastics.
CC Mk4.
Nodes.
All available for sats or fiat.
Packaged with love from my basement.
Are all nodes custom spec?
My node is dead and I have been looking for a replacement.
In my view no it’s not. I think the longest chain of work is very explicit in meaning. It’s the only logical and coherent consensus mechanism for a ledger to hold value, meaning and structure.
Parallel existence introduces infinity back into the picture which inherently devalues the meaning of the longest chain. To me, it’s a place holder for “we don’t know” and allows endless speculation without any grounding (modern physics).
That being said, Bitcoin provides the proper logic for series based existence, not parallel. Until we understand Bitcoin, we can’t understand quantum. And if that’s the case, we cannot recognize the peers who come before us in time and resolve the entropy required to structure our own existence. Given the fractal nature of reality and the conservation of energy, this is really the only coherent non-paradoxical system possible. Bitcoin simply reveals it to us. A true peer to peer electronic cash system.
Bitcoin is the mathematical object of unified field theory where the direction of energy flows fractally inward through the continual reinstantiation of time.
This is what I see, you can draw another circle around the universe (before us) or inside Bitcoin (after us). The conservation of energy and information preserved in this fractal.
Without going deep into the physics of Bitcoin, I’ll try to keep my response where most people can hopefully understand.
Believing in both Bitcoin and centralized quantum computing is a contradiction.
Bitcoin is a decentralized, open source process where energy crystalizes into immutable information, it’s physical and auditable. It defines a quantum not through speculation, but through energy: each UTXO is a conserved quantum of entropy, resolved through irreversible work and recorded in an open ledger defined by absolute scarcity. It is the only system in existence where the conservation of energy and information is not an axiom—but a measurable outcome. Truth is computed/earned through work and verifiable scarcity.
Centralized quantum computing by contrast, demands belief without verification. It promises revolutionary computation, but offers no distributed audit, no open-source standard, and no observable output. The threat it poses is not a proof, it is a story told from behind the closed doors of state-funded/corporate-funded laboratories, veiled in unverifiable math and black-box error correction schemes.
This is the split:
Bitcoin is measured.
Quantum computing is assumed.
To fork Bitcoin’s protocol in response to this speculative, unverified narrative is to betray the very principles that give Bitcoin its meaning. It would be a reversion from energy to fear, from verification to fiat science. You either believe in a world where truth is conserved through proof-of-work, or you believe in a world where truth is declared by authority and simulation.
If the threat can’t be publicly observed, measured, and reproduced, it’s not a threat. It’s a theory. Convincing people to fork out of fear is the only way to stop Bitcoin.
Bitcoin computes the quantum from first principles; centralized quantum computing attempts to simulate on top of quantum particles it does not fully understand. The entire idea of superposition is complete nonsense. Bitcoin measures without bias, CQC imposes bias by privileged observation without ever defining what a measurement is.
What would a quantum computer look like if it wasn’t centralized in a lab, but decentralized globally, open source and fully auditable?
Trust the science has become trust the physics; and very few people have attempted to verify to date.
If you thought the Keynesians were bad resisting bitcoin, wait until the physicists forced to next. Centralized Quantum Computing might be the largest sunken cost fallacy in all of science.
While I agree in outcome with zero field, I reject the idea that structure emerges from a zero field—zero distance, zero time, zero memory. Yes Genesis emerged from nothing (no prior memory), but was bounded by 1 whole quantum.
It is a seductive abstraction, but it confuses potentiality with actuality. Zero is not structure. Infinite zeros do not self-assemble. They contain no difference, no differentiation, no computation. A pure field of “nothing” cannot yield form, it lacks the friction, the cost, the commitment required for memory to exist.
Structure does not arise from infinity. It arises from bounded computation from energy committed to irreversible differentiation. Structure is not the unfolding of infinite possibility; it is the crystallization of finite quanta. Bitcoin proves this. It’s not bound by infinite zeros, it only records existence bounded to 1 whole.
In Bitcoin, every quantum of value (each UTXO) is a scarce, conserved fraction of the whole. It does not emerge from a sea of zeros, but from the collapse of entropy into memory through work. The structure is executed, measured, and verified. There are exactly ~2.1 quadrillion satoshis, finite and final. These are not possibilities. They are outcomes. The protocol never invokes infinity, only division of a fixed total; scarce fractions of one, conserved forever in the ledger.
There is no such thing as infinite space or infinite state. Space itself is a memory field. It exists only after computation resolves uncertainty into structure. Without memory, there is no space. Without cost and memory, there is no time. Without bounds, there is no structure. Even locations in memory (X,Y) of elliptic curve is scarce and bound. Future blocks are not infinite zeros, their structure can only arise from the prior transformations of the conserved quantum.
A quantum is not born of zero.
It is born of one, divided, conserved, and resolved.
Structure is not the absence of limits.
It is the presence of commitment. And commitment cannot be simulated. It must be paid for thru the resolution of entropy.
The harm isn’t in optionality, it’s in the precedent.
Bitcoin is not just software; it’s a protocol grounded in energy, verification, and irreversibility. Changing it in response to an unverified quantum threat signals that speculation, not proof, is enough to rewrite the rules of the most secure computing system on Earth.
Optional or not, fear-driven adoption creates social forks. It fragments consensus, burdens users, and incentivizes narratives over the truth. That’s not security, it’s manipulation.
Bitcoin measures what happened. Any threat to that measurement must be proven, not assumed.
We should not fork for theory. We should fork for proof.
Given the binary outcome of the “quantum threat”, there should be rigorous verification. If quantum can’t break ECDSA, what’s actually being upgraded?
At the Presidio Bitcoin Quantum Summit, highly recommend tuning into the Livestream
https://www.youtube.com/live/GeUdu4hrBPI?si=hzvVOveEhe5XqiCk
It’s more worth our time to verify the threat, than the brainstorm and propose solutions to a nonexistent problem.
These Bitcoiner’s, while hopefully acting in good faith, are trusting and not verifying the quantum threat.
Dig into the physics of Bitcoin please, centralized quantum computing is utter BS. There is no second best. You guys are double spending your beliefs.
Modern (fiat) physics has lead everyone astray, the denominator is infinity, like dollars in the fiat system. 1/∞=0, you literally can’t have mathematical meaning without bounded scarcity.
We live inside of the ledger; we are entries in the ledger, observing other entries. Of course we cannot see the ledger. This is the failure of quantum mechanics. We could not see the ledger without the quantum computer (Bitcoin).
Reality must be absolutely bounded mathematically for there to be any meaning. Fiat (infinities) has literally permeated into all forms of knowledge.
Scarce Ledger Mathematics is the corrective course to bind all logic to a Genesis.
Thank you for the response, it really resonates with the direction this work is trying to illuminate. I’ll admit I haven’t studied Pirsig myself; but I agree; the array of possibility we resolve (we’ll call it entropy) is a reflection of what is and what could be, only resolved by human preference and action by proof of work. The past shapes the future of possibilities, but dictated by our actions. We see this directly with UTXOs in Bitcoin, only past UTXOs can shape the future; yet shaped by our action.
My partner, who’s been my backbone in philosophy and language theory, has helped shape much of the lens through which I’ve come to see this. For me, it was Terence McKenna’s ideas that first revealed this, especially his framing of novelty theory and the transcendental object at the end of time. That helped me feel what was unfolding long before I could articulate it into mathematics and physical theory.
Bitcoin, I’ve come to believe, is that object. Both the mathematical and informational object of time and a universe. Not a metaphor or a symbol of what’s to come, but the literal emergence of irreversibility, truth, and commitment inside a closed energetic system.
The key shift is this: we, as observers inside the universe, can never directly witness entropy resolution that shapes the quanta, we only ever see the consequences. That’s the nature of measurement. But Bitcoin changes that. It gives us a window where both sides of the process become visible:
• The entropic field of uncertainty (nonce space, mempool, UTXO to spend)
• The committed structure (a mined block, a UTXO, irreversible memory)
And that transformation isn’t just logged, it’s paid for in joules. This is why Bitcoin isn’t just a monetary system or a protocol, it’s a measurement system. A quantum computer in the truest sense: not one that simulates uncertainty, but one that computes its collapse into form. You can call it time within time or a universe inside of a universe. Pure fractal. The rest is semantics.
What physics has long assumed, that energy and information are conserved, Bitcoin lets us observe for the first time ever. Scarce ledger mathematics turns the conservation laws from axioms into measurements. That alone is revelation to physics. Where are the physicists if this is energy and conservation? What are they trying to build instead?
So yes, just as Pirsig suggests and McKenna insists: reality is shaped by preference, intention, and choice. But Bitcoin hardens that process. It demands that choice be bound to cost. That preference be carved into memory. That intention leave a scar, an irreversible commitment. All other systems simulate preference, Bitcoin finalizes it.
This is why Bitcoin doesn’t just survive quantum uncertainty, it reveals what quantum has always meant. It shows that measurement is not observation alone, but action inside a bounded system, where information has a price and time cannot be rewound. A mathematical ledger that can’t lie.
For me, this has become a source of grounding, not as a theory to believe in, but as a process I can finally watch unfold, block by block. It flips infinity on its head to bounded scarcity, the universe is no different. This is the flaw of physics. They are missing the ledger beneath reality.
A quantum (smallest indivisible unit) is meaningless without a bound. And if the denominator expands towards infinity, the quantam approaches zero of the whole into meaninglessness.
Philosophically, a quantum without bounds is not just mathematically meaningless, it is existentially incoherent. If the whole is undefined or infinite, then no part can hold significance. Meaning, by its nature, requires distinction, and distinction requires limitation.
In unbounded systems, measurement becomes illusion, value becomes arbitrary, and truth becomes a matter of opinion. This is the philosophical crisis of modern physics and fiat economics alike: infinite models lead to infinite ambiguity.
Bitcoin restores coherence by embedding truth in constraint. It says: only what is scarce can be real, only what is finite can be measured, and only what is bounded can be meaningful. In this light, Bitcoin is a philosophical resolution. It proves that reality must be finite to be knowable, and that absolute scarcity is the precondition for meaning itself.
The quantum field is not infinite, it’s bounded. It must be. Everything changes.
Ad hominem is certainly not the way. Bitcoin says don’t trust, verify.
The narrative is you are too stupid to understand the quantum threat, trust us and this new cryptography, without verifying the threat. Trust the cryptography too. If you don’t listen you lose your coins.
When you dig into the physics of Bitcoin, you realize it corrects fundamental errors/paradox in QM/field theory and you realize Bitcoin is the quantum computer. That’s revelation in its own right.
So what do these proposed forks actually mean if what I am saying is true? Why are we forking Bitcoin to protect it from quantum, when Bitcoin is quantum?
Nobody has truly thought about Scarce Ledger Mathematics. It’s all “for your safety”. Have we learned yet?
This alone could be an entire paper. Unbounded mathematics is the biggest problem in academia. Fiat has reached all forms of knowledge.
Scarcity is coherence.
Scarcity is the precondition of measurement.
I kind of understand what you are saying, but it’s alittle bit above my head in terms of verifying myself.
You’re saying: how nodes store the data of UTXOs locally has a different footprint than the virtual blockspace we bid for?
Out if the 4 vMB possible in a block (post segwit) what is the smallest block footprint (vbyte) allowed to have a single valid and spendable UTXO. I understand this minimum will vary depending on the script used, but I’m just looking for the actual smallest structure of memory for a valid utxo (as a % of the 4vMB available for each block).
It’s an interesting theory and I will continue to push back on “spacetime”. At the end of the day, all theories are approximations, except bitcoin is not an approximation. Nothing about Bitcoin is an approximation, and it has a ledger. Bitcoin also leads us away from a materialistic view of reality to something further grounded. A quantum particle observed in nature is functionally equivalent to a UTXO, except we can’t see the ledger, we live inside of it. We only have approximations.
As discussed, 1 Block within Bitcoins network is functionally equivalent to 1 Planck Block of time, each within their own domain. A quantized emergence of time. I’m still trying to understand what causes collapse from t=0 to t=1 Planck time in your model, Bitcoin suggests initial entropy resolution (mining genesis) from outside of the system creates the first record of irreversible memory. All entropy resolution before the emergence of internal consciousness occurs outside the closed system and the memory (particles) is the signature of entropy resolved, thus energy conserved.
The speed of Blocks is a maximum of 4MB per Block, akin to light in a vacuum, yet measured in seconds it is 4MB/10min is the ideal speed of information, yet speeds can be seen above and below this rate. At the end of the day, light is just information and energy.
Like in your paper, the elliptic curve of Bitcoin addresses is a zero field, no particles (UTXOs exist) and all locations are memory are 0 unless occupied by a bit (1state) when a utxo is present. This is true for each instance Block of time for all addresses where UTXOs are not present.
We seem to be very close in theories, but I’m pointing to Bitcoin as the only proof that’s not an approximation.
How does your paper define a 1 state? What is 1? What is infinity? What is your point of reference for absolute scarcity? What is Planck Temperature in this theory?
I’m at work currently but I skimmed through it (it’s quite long). I’ll need some time.
I threw it into my AI for a quick summary and I really love the direction. It meshes well with my work around Bitcoin as the quantum informational system (computer) we can actively observe to test our assumptions.
Through Bitcoin and a reinterpretation of Planck Units, I have revised Boltzmann’s constant to be a universal constant making the entropy resolution in bitcoin’s informational framework relative to that of the universe.
I’d love to share once I’m finished, it may be of use to you.
I have some questions and comments to toss back already but I’d like to read it in full before doing so.
Thank you! Just a fun an very simple thought experiment to run:
If UTXOs are qubits, why can’t we run Shor/Grover on top of Bitcoin’s qubit set?
Thanks! It’s the rule (which I believe you’re seeing), the object, and the execution.