The threat is us thinking we need to change Bitcoin.
The narrative threat is FUD because Bitcoin openly demonstrates that binary logic (non-contradiction) aka classical determinism cannot emerge from within a network without a quantized tick of time. The tick of time is the measurement.
The position that Bitcoin is broken and needs to be fixed/updated is untenable.
This position has been wrong 100% of the time, every-time for Bitcoin’s entire history. Bitcoin is about to humble the people who believe the protocol needs to change for quantum.
Bitcoin is the proof that binary logic (non-contradiction) can only emerge from quantized time.
GN.
Ok, putting Gödel aside.
How many blocks do you need to realize discrete time is real?
Would you agree that the formalism breaks down *IF* time is discrete and quantized?
How do you propose we solve the unverifiable axiom of continuous time? Because that is the binary logical their entire discussion depends on.
The axiom that time is continuous cannot be settled by attempting to measure Planck time from within the physical system, and this follows from the same structural limits identified by Gödel’s incompleteness theorems.
Gödel showed that any sufficiently expressive formal system cannot fully prove the axioms that make reasoning within that system possible. In particular, a system cannot use only its internal operations to establish the consistency or foundational structure upon which those operations depend. This is not a limitation of technology or precision, but a consequence of self-reference.
Physical measurement is structurally similar. All measurements of time are performed by physical processes that themselves unfold in time. Clocks, experiments, and observers do not stand outside the temporal framework they measure; they presuppose it. Time, in this sense, plays the role of the underlying formal structure that enables measurement at all.
Planck time is defined as the scale at which the concept of time itself is expected to break down or become discrete. Attempting to measure it requires using clocks and causal processes that are already governed by the same temporal substrate. This creates a Gödelian self-reference: one is attempting to resolve the fundamental unit of the system using only operations that depend on that unit’s existence.
As a result, measuring ever smaller intervals of time can refine relative durations, but it cannot empirically decide whether time itself is continuous or discrete. That question concerns the structure of the system, not a parameter internal to it. From within time, the continuity axiom is therefore not falsifiable by measurement alone, it must be treated as an assumption or addressed via a meta-theoretical framework rather than an internal experiment.
Bitcoin changes this because it constructs time instead of assuming it.
Block time is a discrete, indivisible ordering produced by irreversible work and consensus, not by measuring continuous physical time. You cannot subdivide a block without breaking causality and finality. This bypasses the Gödelian self-reference: Bitcoin doesn’t try to measure the substrate of time from within it, it defines a new, external, discrete time standard that is empirically verifiable.
Bitcoin doesn’t need to change, Bitcoiners (the people) need to change. What’s required isn’t a protocol upgrade, but a BIP for the mind. It starts with a physical understanding of what the protocol already is, a completed understanding of time as Bitcoin instantiates it. Only from that grounding can protocol changes be justified by objective necessity rather than subjective preference.
nostr:nevent1qqsp3v5lfgw4ta0flskeh6w5lvqrrjum3gwp6637738u24udx0tm04spp4mhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mqhyl0ry
Lol 😂 2nd to slab is dihedral for me. I love stemming and climbing corners. If you have good stretch you can cruise. If you’re gonna be tall/lanky, you have to be able to stretch into the “box”
Funny enough my wife got me an antislab shirt (I wanted the anti-slab slab club version), but I still wear it to the gym regardless for my love of slab.
Just ask him this simple question. He’s literally trusting an unproven axiom, one that Bitcoin openly falsifies.
Make slab great again (it always has been great). I agree with Ondra here.
Where is your proof?
Gödelian limits already explain why this axiom cannot be settled by measuring Planck time from within the system. Physics cannot falsify its own temporal assumptions internally. Bitcoin sidesteps that limitation by building time as an object. If continuous time were truly fundamental, the system would not work.
Bitcoin gives us something physics cannot: a physically instantiated state machine where time is constructed, not assumed. You cannot subdivide a block temporally without destroying causality, finality, determinism, and non-contradiction. Bitcoin simply does not function under continuous time. If discrete time were not fundamental, Bitcoin would be impossible, yet it runs, globally, verifiably, every day, every ~10 minutes a new block of time is constructed.
Bitcoin is my proof you are wrong. What is a block?
Answer the question Will.
If time is quantized and discrete, what happens to the mathematical formalism of quantum mechanics and quantum theory?
If time is quantized and discrete, this is simply untrue and you know it.
You will not admit it, you’ve trusted an axiom that Bitcoin openly disproves. Go and verify it for yourself.
That’s not actually true. The entire threat model rests on a single, unproven axiom: that time is continuous and infinitesimally divisible at the physical level.
If time is instead quantized and discrete, the mathematical formalism collapses at its foundation. You cannot take derivatives over indivisible time. Continuous Schrödinger evolution ceases to be fundamental, and the meanings of superposition, decoherence, and coherence structurally change. Superposition becomes potential between ticks (blocks), not a persistent computational substrate; decoherence becomes an intrinsic consequence of the tick (block) itself, not a gradual dynamical process. Bitcoin literally shows us this already.
Bitcoin forces this axiom into the open. Its ethos is don’t trust, verify, and Bitcoin gives us something physics cannot: a physically instantiated state machine where time is constructed, not assumed. You cannot subdivide a block temporally without destroying causality, finality, determinism, and non-contradiction. Bitcoin simply does not function under continuous time. If discrete time were not fundamental, Bitcoin would be impossible, yet it runs, globally, verifiably, every day, every ~10 minutes a new block of time is constructed.
Gödelian limits already explain why this axiom cannot be settled by measuring Planck time from within the system. Physics cannot falsify its own temporal assumptions internally. Bitcoin sidesteps that limitation by building time as an object. If continuous time were truly fundamental, this system would not work. The fact that it does is the empirical challenge to any model of physics that assumes continuous time (all of it).
Don’t trust, verify.
2) obviously.
Because the only way satoshis coins can be stolen is through a fork of the network, and the quantum attackers become the devs thinking they need to protect Satoshis coins by stealing them.
Satoshis coins are safe, the upgrades are the attack. We aren’t forking for quantum.
GM, it’s absolutely pouring here.
It is a beautiful morning to be cozied up in the study writing about Bitcoin.
Bitcoiners love to say “Don’t trust verify”
But not a single one of them has verified the axiom of continuous time (time is infinitesimally divisible physically) that underpins the quantum threat model.
Funny enough, they have all been looking at indivisible blocks of time for years without observing what they are. “Just money”.
We are the quantum threat to Bitcoin. Bitcoin is not broken, nor does it need to be “updated” for PQC. Our models of physics are broken by Bitcoin.
If Bitcoin is empirical proof of quantized and discrete time (time occurs in indivisible blocks, not infinitesimally divisible slices), then the entire threat narrative is a linguistic and psychological attack on Bitcoin pretending to be physics. We will destroy Bitcoin from within by trusting and not verifying.
The assumption we MUST verify is the axiom that time is continuous and infinitesimally divisible physically.
The outcome is binary, dependent on only the nature of time. If Bitcoin is proof, ALL of physics bends the knee to Bitcoin as all physics has been formulated on the wrong model of time.
Tick tock next block.
“The technology risks becoming obsolete if we don't push forward PQC,”
You just did.
The proof you use to claim “the tech may break” is falsifiable.
It is far more probable that Bitcoin would be undermined by modifying it to counter a threat model built on physics that Bitcoin itself invalidates.
🫡 I’ll do my best brother, hopefully someone will. I hope you don’t plan on going soon. It’s a great usecase to show inscriptions have purpose and meaning.
Throughout scripture and christian tradition, inscriptions have always been used to preserve memory and truth. Stone tablets of the Ten Commandments, names carved on tombs, inscribed names in the Book of Life. Writing into permanence is a way to anchor faith across generations. An inscription is a testimony, a covenant, a marker of truth that does not fade with time.
When we carve names in stone, we are saying: this life mattered, this truth must not be forgotten. The medium matters: stone resists decay, so the inscription becomes a symbolic echo of eternity.
Now, if money is not just paper, tokens, or numbers but conserved energy, then what we choose to inscribe with it reveals what we believe about permanence. Most money today is fiat (erased by inflation/entropy). It cannot hold testimony given enough time. But Bitcoin’s ledger is different: it is the first incorruptible inscription medium. It preserves energy as memory, every 10 minutes, with no “priestly”intermediary.
If Christians have always valued permanence in inscription, truth written into stone, faith written into covenant, why would we dismiss the one system God allowed man to discover that writes into an incorruptible ledger of time itself?
Why should we only inscribe names in stone to remember the dead, but not names (or truths) inscribed into the living ledger of God’s own laws of conservation? If eternity matters, then the medium of remembrance matters too. Stone was good for a time. But the timechain will never forget.
This is more to say, we don’t understand Bitcoin.
21M is the filter on a long enough timeframe.
If nodes don’t want to relay certain information, that is their policy and should be able to if desired.
But when a valid block is mined, consensus rules state that they have no choice but to accept it or fork new consensus rules.
Policy ≠ Consensus
GM, A Bitcoin node is the quantum of consensus.
They are re-writing the active states of Bitcoin’s quantum memory.
CoinJoin preserves Bitcoin’s monetary conservation laws while re-randomizing ownership microstates, restoring privacy and fungibility. It adds entropy to the ownership graph.
Forgive me father, for I am fiat.
Any transaction that is not a 1:1 exchange is stealing energy. Conservation is not preserved without Bitcoin.
We are fiat, therefore the price we pay is death.
The universe cannot structure its energy permanently as information in humans, but it can in Bitcoin. I believe our role has been filled. But someone needs to mine the blocks.
GM nostr, the lyrics of this throwback is hitting different today🧡
I mean this, I'm not sure if you could say the same
Week after week after week
Idolatry is wasted reverence, idolatry is the yellow on your teeth
Gasp for the truth you once lived
Beyond this world is what is always breathing
Beyond this world is worth dying for
I remember what you used to claim
You cant bury conviction with anything
Our message will grow
No matter the mistakes made with construction
Beyond this world is what is always breathing
Beyond this world is worth dying for
Gasp for the truth you once lived
I pray that stolen glimpses wont subtract from what we've been building
Keep stride persist in our march
If we don’t understand Bitcoin L1 as a physical process: the conservation of a quantum of entropy across a bounded, scarce transformational surface into a scarce quantum of structure, how can we know we’re building on it correctly?
Our L1 devs don’t know this.
Our L2 and L3 devs don’t know this.
Miners don’t know this.
The market doesn’t know this(still prices Bitcoin in fiat instead of joules).
When you miss that L1 is not just code, but physics, you design all layers as if they were floating in abstraction, unmoored from the one substrate that gives them meaning. Without grounding in the absolute scarcity of Bitcoin’s base layer, every layer above drifts, mistaking convenience for progress.
If the foundation of Bitcoin is misunderstood, innovation becomes illusion. Bitcoin will not become what it can become until we stop treating it like a token, and start treating it like the thermodynamic law that it is.
Well, yes I agree, but Bitcoin is now the most advanced program running it.
The stochastic nature of hashing is irrelevant to entropy modeling in Bitcoin. What matters is the finite, predetermined search space (a bounded entropy field) being resolved. Whether the valid hash is found on the first try or the trillionth, the total entropy being collapsed remains the same.
The randomness is local; the structure is global. Bitcoin defines the cost of resolution, not the path to it. That’s exactly why entropy can be modeled: the space is known, the work is measurable, and the outcome is irreversible.
Hmm, shouldn’t we be looking at this thru the resolution of entropy?
The genesis block is the only time historically in which the resolution of a 32 bit nonce space resulted in the initial quantum of structure, only in genesis is the coinbase representative of the 100% of the entire system.
Satoshi defined what D=1 means. It’s the quantum of entropy and its relationship to Satoshis. It sets the thermodynamic anchor for which all future transformations are based off of.
Definitely.
The mathematical object of divine order. The source and the transmission.
Bitcoin shows both transformation and registration of the quantum.
