I’ve been saying this in words that I’ve not until recently had and this article is along the same lines; the way bitcoin hashing works acts like a coarse-grained measurement for the creation of a single entropic root of truth in a global time (noted by @dergigi) effectively making the argument that the #Bitcoin acts a quantum process, not solely classical due to it’s use of classical ‘measurements’ (hashes). Due to the distributed nature of machines and hash rates and potential, though relatively rare, for superposition which temporally reconciles with the longest chain. Which would make observers to the system, those with access to private keys that could observe the network within itself.

A bunch of pieces from a below linked article.

“The framework of our Physics Project makes it natural to think of coarse-grained evolution as a multicomputational process—in which a given coarse-grained state has not just a single successor, but in general multiple possible successors.”

“But what will observers perceive? There’s considerable trickiness here—particularly in connection with quantum mechanics—that we’ll discuss later. In essence, the point is that there are many paths of history for the universe, that branch and merge—and observers sample certain collections of paths. And for example on some paths the computations may simply halt, with no further rules applying—so that in effect “time stops”, at least for observers on those paths.” 🤔

Read the following and try not to think of #Bitcoin:

“As “large-scale observers” of spacetime we’re always effectively doing coarse graining. So now we can ask how many microscopic configurations of spacetime (or space) are consistent with whatever result we get from that coarse graining.”

A description of blocks:

“But if we could ever find a case where it is instead small, this would be somewhere we could expect to start seeing a breakdown of the continuum “equilibrium” structure of spacetime, and where evidence of discreteness should start to show up.”

Timechain:

“For spacetime, features of the causal graph have some definite interpretations. We define the reference frame we’re using by specifying a foliation of the causal graph.”

Bringing it together:

“And in the end randomness in quantum measurements is happening for essentially the same basic reason we’d see randomness if we looked at small numbers of molecules in a gas: it’s not that there’s anything fundamentally not deterministic underneath, it’s just there’s a computational process that’s making things too complicated for us to “decode”, at least as observers with bounded computational capabilities.”