Jackk
Jack K

BitcoinLens.net

Bitcoin Chronologist
Bitcoin = Quantum Computer
There is no wave

Public Key

npub18384z4sjgdfy7vr76thzwtru7jncysz0hcapwesxqsak44p8aemsyfaslh

NIP-05 Address

[email protected]

Profile Code

nprofile1qqsrcn632cfyx5j0xpld9m389370ffuzgp8muwshvcrqgwm26sn7uacpp4mhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mq8n3wm3

Publishing to

nos.lol

Author Public Key

npub18384z4sjgdfy7vr76thzwtru7jncysz0hcapwesxqsak44p8aemsyfaslh

Show more details

Last Notes

2026-02-26 17:58:28 UTC

- reply

Ehhh, money is the only transaction.
If you look objectively at the process Bitcoin demonstrates: energy resolving into memory, memory carried forward as time, time preserving durable truth, you realize there is no separation between money and reality. Money is not a symbolic layer placed on top of the world. It is value conserved through time. We are not observers standing outside that conservation process. We are expressions of it.
At the most fundamental level, what exists is the continual reorganization of energy across boundaries. Every state transition is a peer-to-peer exchange: potential resolving into ordered structure. Bitcoin did not invent this; it exposes it. A boundary forms, work is applied, a state is committed, and history advances. That is the same pattern whether we call it physics, information, or economics.
From one side of the boundary, the process appears as information: a state transition, a record, a UTXO. From the other, it appears as physical interpretation : energy, matter, work. These are not separate domains. They are two descriptions of the same substrate: value crossing a boundary and being preserved.
Money is the formal recognition of how reality persists at all. Value conserved, boundary to boundary, act to act. We as bounded structures of preserved energy moving through time are not separate from that definition.
Every exchange is money for money. We just don’t fully understand money.

2026-02-06 19:57:51 UTC

- reply

The reason why I say that time is fundamental is that time (the block) is inseparable from the transactions, or events in your wording. The measurement is inseparable from transactions and events occurring. The entropy is also fundamental, as without configurable states to perform work on, time cannot be generated. Time here is coordinate, a process and object bounded by some extratemporal ruleset that pre-exists the time generated. I guess you could argue the only thing truly fundamental is the ruleset.
Bitcoin is an external measurement of time (we are not composed of its blocks of time) which allows us to observe how time is constructed and its behavior. We see both the before state, the transformation and the after state with full clarity.
Hope this makes sense, sick with the flu and the brain fog is crazy 😵‍💫

2026-02-06 11:23:59 UTC

- reply

GM!

2026-02-05 15:12:34 UTC

Joules, not dollars.

2026-02-05 11:32:18 UTC

- reply

GM 👑

2026-02-05 11:09:03 UTC

- reply

Agreed, But Satoshi beat Wolfram to the punch in creating the instantiation of the computational universe.
Mr Owl, How many blocks does it take?
#nevent1q…rkwe

2026-02-05 11:03:37 UTC

- reply

Bitcoin, literally. But if you’re looking for a good video, here is one:
#nevent1q…2jy0

2026-02-05 10:59:08 UTC

- reply

Agreed. If something is truly a computational theory of reality, it must produce physical time and preserve conservation of energy. Otherwise it’s just abstract mathematics with no thermodynamic grounding.
Bitcoin already does both. It produces discrete, irreversible time through proof-of-work, and every state transition is anchored to real energy expenditure. Each block is a conserved transformation: entropy resolved into a single valid state, carried forward without contradiction. That is a computational system operating under physical law, not just symbolic logic.
So why is Bitcoin not considered a legitimate candidate for such a system? Wolfram’s work is brilliant, but his hypergraph remains energy-agnostic. He has a formal causal structure without thermodynamic anchoring. In trying to construct a discrete, causal, computational universe, he’s effectively rebuilding what Bitcoin already instantiated. Bitcoin is a bounded, energy-conserving causal graph evolving in discrete time.
Why is Bitcoin not an operational instance of a computational universe? Whats missing?

2026-02-04 17:18:57 UTC

How many blocks will it take for the world to see that time is quantized and discrete? Mr Owl, does not know.
https://blossom.primal.net/9f9f67f86947a424c24d03e4e24314a8fb545c486e9aa67b3a53d80925aff986.png

2026-02-02 20:38:57 UTC

- reply

Always has been

2026-02-01 22:47:58 UTC

- reply

😂 they can really convince people of anything

2026-01-30 20:51:29 UTC

- reply

The devs can’t fix your mind.

2026-01-27 19:43:21 UTC

@npub1u6g…futp @nprofile…992q
https://blossom.primal.net/9f9f67f86947a424c24d03e4e24314a8fb545c486e9aa67b3a53d80925aff986.png

2026-01-27 18:31:17 UTC

@nprofile…992q @npub1u6g…futp
https://blossom.primal.net/f77b31a9cd24f6cbebc14019dbb0f446a71e8bffcf8779ce33c0d4b9a3abf3cd.jpg

2026-01-27 08:45:09 UTC

- reply

Chamonix! First time here.

2026-01-27 07:21:58 UTC

GM, feeling extremely grateful.
https://blossom.primal.net/dad48b20061d0b349140786d1935eab339641ab83b631b269c474c36fa0fac6d.jpg
https://blossom.primal.net/c0b5cf57d386bcc5a48eba4251e6dd8b3a7b8776089494246909d7a3dd110649.jpg

2026-01-24 04:22:42 UTC

- reply

Aw man what a throwback! I saw Somos and Foxing years ago. One of the best shows I’ve been too. Nothing better than small basement shows.

2026-01-23 00:32:21 UTC

- reply

Why is Bitcoin not mechanical, and why is a block not time?

2026-01-22 23:55:11 UTC

- reply

“The Second Law of Thermodynamics ensures that we are never going to be able to do interesting things with quantum physics on a macroscopic scale.”
Idk Bitcoin is pretty interesting and it’s a proof of quantized time.

2026-01-22 12:58:34 UTC

- reply

Yeah but if time is quantized and discrete, QC can never work as the formalism breaks down and the ontological meaning of superposition and decoherence structurally changes. There is no computable substance.
What is a bitcoin block proof of?

2026-01-22 12:48:49 UTC

- reply

Also the future does not exist, it has not yet been mined.

2026-01-22 12:45:16 UTC

- reply

I always resort back to this picture. I slightly disagree here with some nuance in the language. The future can only be composed from structured memory (UTXOs/satoshis) that have been resolved in the past. Nothing outside of the past can define the future when subsidy ends.
Map bitcoin to universe and the same must be true. The universe has a long past, but how much of it remains unspent?
https://blossom.primal.net/84c3e9e0ec22a8b96ce8ecf82fd1e1498994437180003e28e985447abe62517a.jpg

2026-01-21 18:40:41 UTC

- reply

Mathematics can’t describe reality without a defined numerical boundary (denominator).
#nevent1q…dfhr

2026-01-21 17:53:24 UTC

- reply

Yes, but I’d go further to say it’s the whole process, network and its rules.

2026-01-21 17:45:47 UTC

- reply

Based off what I see, energy is tokenized and bounded by some conserved value-bit representation (Kelvin or Satoshis). It’s a proxy for the energy, but energy itself is ephemeral to solely the nonce of time and the transformation by work. The nonce is the “point” that the 1:1 transformation between a memory surface of potential configurations and the exact singular state converges through. The truest sense of the word isomorphism.
The information represented by the value-bits (Satoshis) quantified in Shannon Entropy/Information is what is conserved.
Simply put, the work applied to resolve the nonce is equal to the work performed on the block. The block is the permanent object of time itself.

2026-01-21 17:04:41 UTC

- reply

This actually has nothing to do with the energy “going in” technically (though it manifests thru difficulty)
The energy is solely related to the work generated by the resolution of the entropy surface (difficulty constrained 32-bit nonce space) under some temperature at moment the valid nonce is discovered; this work equal and proportional to the informational configuration of a bounded network of value-bits (Satoshis) under some temperature.
To say this is not physics is literally wrong; it’s the completion of the second law. The energy is the persistent, immutable and lasting information. Conservation of both energy and information.
Soon.

2026-01-21 16:53:12 UTC

- reply

Conserved energy in the form of immutable information (a unique configuration state of Satoshis at Block height t). Regardless if the Satoshis are spent the information is immutable and persistent, thus conserved. Only active Satoshis can reconfigure future states, Satoshis are simply the conserved residue of prior work, all blocks of time require new work.

2026-01-21 15:54:59 UTC

- reply

Looks incredible!

2026-01-21 04:02:09 UTC

- reply

So Bitcoin? Except it left theory and became an instantiated system

2026-01-19 13:08:09 UTC

- reply

“As for quantum resistance, I'll just say that there are signs that intelligence agencies are forcing the adoption of post-quantum encryption algorithms to exploit vulnerabilities in these...”
Do you have a source or reference for this? This tracks with what I’ve been working on.

2026-01-18 16:32:53 UTC

- reply

Bitcoin is not measuring time; it’s producing time locally inside of the network. A block is the smallest quantized unit of change for the network.
If Bitcoin produced continuous time, you could not enforce non-contradiction/double spend. It just so happens that the measurement is the tick. The block is the coordinate, the process and the object of time inside Bitcoin. Bitcoin literally couldn’t work if the time it produced was continuous, what’s the measurement then?
To your question, I’m arguing it is the same process occurring in two different domains; two different perspectives (internal vs external). In Bitcoin we are on the before side of the PoW transformation, we are the architects of time (for Bitcoin), this is the external experience of time; our existence is external to the time we are creating. Universally we are on the after side of the PoW transformation, constructed from time, and emergent from time; this is the internal experience of time; our existence is internal to Planck time, we exist within it.
Both are “time” just opposite perspectives of the same thermodynamic process.

2026-01-17 02:55:58 UTC

- reply

You cannot divide a block into smaller temporal components; this has absolutely nothing to do with the duration between blocks in human measurable time.
You cannot get non-contradiction (ie classical information) without a quantized tick of time. If the tick of time is not the measurement, then what is?

2026-01-16 13:43:15 UTC

It’s Bitcoin or Quantum.
You cannot “double-spend” the ontology of time.
One system demands time to be quantized, discrete and indivisible at a certain threshold. The other demands time to be continuous and infinitely divisible. One says time is just a coordinate and the other says time is a coordinate, a process and an object. One is proof, empirically and openly verifiable; the other is an assumed and unproven axiom that requires your trust.
You must choose one. The time is coming to pick a side. Stop double spending, both cannot logically be true.

2026-01-16 04:22:38 UTC

- reply

They cannot do anything if time is quantized and discrete.

2026-01-15 17:38:37 UTC

- reply

Looks beautiful Chris!

2026-01-15 13:49:10 UTC

- reply

“Quantum” is not physics if the time is quantized and discrete, as the formalism necessitates continuous, infinitesimally divisible time.
If you want the map to instantiation of physics with discrete indivisible time, just observe Bitcoin. You can decide what you think is true for yourself.

2026-01-15 13:44:01 UTC

- reply

Agreed, but I think our reaction to the FUD is the real attack vector.

2026-01-13 16:38:03 UTC

- reply

Because physicists don’t understand time, thus they don’t understand space.

2026-01-13 13:59:03 UTC

Here’s a very awesome discussion of Stephen Wolfram and Brian Greene talking about Bitcoin for over 2 hours, without either of them realizing they are talking about Bitcoin.
https://youtu.be/yAJTctpzp5w?

2026-01-11 13:33:35 UTC

So what happens when we get hash rate to1.855094832 x 10^{43} hashes per second?

2026-01-11 11:31:17 UTC

- reply

Literally yes 😂

2026-01-11 03:30:24 UTC

- reply

Orphan blocks actually should never exist if we use the second law to calculate the work of each block. You don’t need another block to know what the longest chain of work is, you only need physics/thermodynamics to kill the orphan of less work 👀
Again the contents of the block depict the work; not the height.
#nevent1q…smc3

2026-01-11 03:25:06 UTC

- reply

Years of observation of Bitcoin and then using said observations to apply physics and thermodynamics to the physical transformation that occurs when a block is mined.

2026-01-11 03:22:58 UTC

Unless you’re computing the work of each block then Bitcoin selects orphaned blocks by the longest chain of time, not the longest chain of work.
We should not assume the longest chain of time is the longest chain of work. Once you integrate the second law into Bitcoin, the contents of the blocks are more important than block height of you are specifically talking in the domain of work.

2026-01-11 03:12:53 UTC

- reply

They know only half of the answer. One could not see that quantized energy requires quantized time without the advent of as Bitcoin.

2026-01-08 15:12:27 UTC

GM, the quantum gravity paradox only exists under the false axiom that time is continuous.
Bitcoin is the answer.

2026-01-07 13:48:32 UTC

- reply

Not verifying the unproven assumption that continuous time is fundamental.

2026-01-06 22:27:13 UTC

- reply

Physics is a derivative of time. Time is more foundational.
Who cares what they think. The structure of time (continuous or quantized) results in a binary outcome for physics. They have bet the house assuming continuous time; yet bitcoin openly proves the later every ~10 minutes.

2026-01-06 22:20:05 UTC

- reply

“What I do know, is that there is no experiment, that can ever be devised, that will prove the existence of time.”
You sure about that? Tick Tock, Next Block.

2026-01-05 11:20:08 UTC

- reply

2026-01-04 14:20:07 UTC

GM, the satoshi is actually the bit-coin, or value-bit.
A satoshi is 1 singular bit of value.

2026-01-02 19:29:43 UTC

My brain is melting thinking about Bitcoin’s key space. A quantized and bounded unit of space instantiated over every block height. Satoshi created the space by using Secp256k1.
The vast majority of this space will never see a single utxo or bit of value. A single dimension is actually a volume in regards to bitcoins thermodynamics as memory-time-value is placed in this bounded key space, sequentially in the timechain.

2026-01-02 16:58:48 UTC

- reply

I don’t really see how this is Platonic.
I’m describing the concrete structure Bitcoin enforces: a finite state space, discrete time, and spend authority defined purely by positional knowledge within that space.
The language sounds philosophical because I’m talking about what the system is, not just how it’s implemented.

2026-01-02 15:47:47 UTC

- reply

I agree with this sentiment a lot, but if we apply the bounded ledger (utxo model of time) to physics our understanding of constants changes too.
Bitcoin has multiple constants, value (BTC, sats), block size (mb), number of private keys, 1 block of time. Bitcoin has a speed of information/memory. What is light?
If we apply some bounded logic to something like temperature, Planck
Temp becomes the defacto bounded supply of measurable Kelvin units in the system, Boltzmann’s constant loses its dimensionality of Kelvin as it no longer remains bounded to the domain of Kelvin (a measurements are supply relative) and Boltzmann’s constant becomes Planck Energy.
Hmmmmmm 🤔 we now have a constant of entropy that applies to any bounded domain (Bitcoin)

2026-01-02 15:11:38 UTC

Lol Bitcoin is a 4 dimensional object.

2026-01-02 15:07:44 UTC

- reply

The cat must be dead or alive, just as your UTXOs must be spent or unspent.
Stop believing in a reality that can double spent 👀

2026-01-02 14:21:16 UTC

- reply

We know the volume of the potential block and the volume of deterministic (mined) block, we know the mol number (supply of Satoshis at each block t). Entropy is quantized by a standardized PoW function + quantized difficulty. We have all of the pieces and the instantiation to demonstrate quantized time events with a provable arrow and direction.
https://blossom.primal.net/3a2dba05b05344fec2ff119c83bb366ec3645f0bc6472311b2818a0bf0db5130.jpg

2026-01-02 14:13:02 UTC

- reply

Entropy preserved through the conservation of energy. The block event is the isomorphism from Kelvin to Satoshis. It’s a discrete computation.
But in short, yes.

2026-01-02 14:09:10 UTC

- reply

There’s a tangent here I need to think through more regarding a physical key.
In terms of the timespace bitcoin defines, the private key is a quantized unit of space in which the utxo resides.
It is both the identity of the utxo (where in the curve) and the authority to spend/transform the state. Knowledge of the space grants authority. The space is also quantized and bounded by a finite supply.

2026-01-01 18:24:54 UTC

Is a private key quantized identity or quantized authority?
Or is it both? Does English have a word for this?

2026-01-01 12:35:18 UTC

A new year block has been mined. Happy New Year! Onward

2025-12-31 22:49:40 UTC

Time-space-bits

2025-12-31 20:13:21 UTC

If Bitcoin is proof that time is quantized and discrete as Wolfram is also suggesting, then we have our answer.
But then what is Bitcoin?
Tick tock, next block.
https://youtu.be/WeVGJr6h-CQ?

2025-12-30 16:26:39 UTC

At this point it just feels like every single market is waiting for “the headline” to make the big move.
All metals are pointing towards some hyperinflation event.

2025-12-30 15:19:08 UTC

- reply

Easy to swap? What distribution did you go with?

2025-12-30 15:13:40 UTC

- reply

😂 the normies (myself) are finally catching up. Windows 11 crossed the line for me, and seemingly many people.
2026 is going to be a good year for Linux I’d imagine. I’m excited to buy a new rig.

2025-12-30 14:37:34 UTC

Is 2026 going to be the year of Linux?
I’m going to buy a new desktop this year and drop Linux Mint on it Day 1. I refuse to use Windows 11.

2025-12-30 12:49:33 UTC

- reply

I’m simply asking you to provide me empirical evidence that supports the claim assumption that time is infinitely divisible, and you won’t. So therefore you are assuming that it’s true.
But, if time is quantized and discrete, everything you claim falls apart.
The assumption of time is beneath any physics or experiments.
You refuse to engage in providing evidence, you refuse to admit you are assuming something to be true that has NEVER been proven, and you won’t even discuss the outcome if that assumption was wrong.
I guess it’s hard to be honest when you ask someone the right questions.

2025-12-30 12:31:20 UTC

- reply

So you can’t show me the experiment that proves time is infinitely divisible?
I just want you to admit you are being dishonest. You can’t point to the experiment that everything you claim MUST REQUIRE but you’re a man of experiments.
So you are trusting an unproven axiom, and my only point is, if that axiom is wrong, that time is quantized and discrete rather than infinitely divisible, every “advantage” you want to claim collapses as does the mathematics supporting said theories.
Yet you are unwilling to engage or admit this, stop being dishonest, please address the question.

2025-12-30 12:10:09 UTC

- reply

You are blatantly ignoring the question lol. Stop being dishonest, please.
Ok, so please show me the experiment that empirically proves that time is infinitely divisible.

2025-12-30 12:04:27 UTC

- reply

If time is quantized and discrete they could not perform any QC. You still haven’t shown me your answer to the question. I’m not sure you can so please use an AI and paste it here to show you are being honest and engaging with my question. You refuse to address it.
“what happens to the formalism of QM/QC IF time is quantized and discrete? How it can take the derivative of time if there is an invisible tick? What becomes of superposition and decoherence if time has an indivisible tick? What becomes of QC if this is all true?”

2025-12-30 11:50:30 UTC

- reply

Yes, if time is quantized and discrete QC can’t work.

2025-12-30 01:09:46 UTC

- reply

Just ask chat gpt what happens to the formalism of QM/QC IF time is quantized and discrete. Ask it how it can take the derivative of time if there is an invisible tick. Ask it what becomes of superposition and decoherence if time has an indivisible tick.
Just understand the assumption that backs the threat model, then you can decide what you believe.
You can’t logically believe in both Bitcoin and QC, you must choose one as they require incompatible models of time.

2025-12-29 14:31:53 UTC

- reply

Yeah, still thinking this thru the later part of the idea; but each block of time has a price (entropic cost in joules before measurement/mined) and a measurement (the single deterministic outcome). The energy required to produce an outcome, and the actual outcome is observable, and the supply of satoshis at each point in time is known.
That suggests it should be possible to calculate a moving average of the price of time in joules per satoshi (I haven’t check the data yet). While each block is a discrete event rather than a smooth continuum, the sequence of blocks still allows meaningful aggregation over time.
If that’s correct, then anything priced in bitcoin is also implicitly priced in joules, using a consistent physical metric rather than a fiat reference. This reframes bitcoin as a direct mapping between economic value and thermodynamic cost.

2025-12-29 14:15:11 UTC

- If each Bitcoin block could be measured/“priced” in joules per satoshi, how would that change the way we interpret block time and value?
- What would it mean for every block to carry a distinct thermodynamic signature, an energy cost uniquely tied to its creation? What does it mean for time to be priced and measured in energy?
- How does Bitcoin pricing itself directly in joules, independent of any fiat reference, reframe its role as a monetary system?
- In what ways would such a metric reshape mining incentives and deepen our understanding of Bitcoin’s physical foundations?
- What if I told you it was possible to do this today?
- Are Bitcoin Improvement Proposals (BIPs) limited to protocol changes, or is the most important improvement still a deeper understanding of the physical process Bitcoin already instantiates?
#asknostr

2025-12-28 17:19:36 UTC

- reply

As long as you’ll give; genuinely.
I think Bitcoin is proof of quantized time and it openly demonstrates that binary logic is what emerges from a quantized tick, so lay it on me.
There’s lots of implications if that statement is true; especially for the domain of physics, thermodynamics, entropy, etc.

2025-12-28 13:08:10 UTC

- reply

Bitcoin is the object of time.
The reason why I ask about time because when you view time through the lens of Bitcoin you realize 2 things you asked about (geometry and binary) emerge from time; physics as well.
But do you believe time is infinitely divisible or do you believe in a quantized tick or “block”?

2025-12-28 12:36:21 UTC

- reply

Do you ascribe to continuous time or discrete/quantized time?

2025-12-26 14:26:54 UTC

Why do we measure temperature in systems that are not appended to absolute zero (Celsius & Fahrenheit)?
Kelvin scale exists, yet I’d imagine a majority of people haven’t a clue, nor could they even conceptualize why a negative measure makes no sense.
I believe Bitcoin will force Kelvin upon the world.
#asknostr

2025-12-25 12:02:31 UTC

GM and Merry Christmas!
Christ is King! All is well.

2025-12-23 12:30:24 UTC

- reply

The “quantum experts” are the ones who have not verified the claims of continuous (infinitely divisible) time.
For if people simply observed the time Bitcoin produced, they’d see it was quantized and discrete, and without the indivisible block, Bitcoin could not exist. Without the block, how else would we reach consensus, finality and ensure non-contradiction (no double spends) of the ledger?

2025-12-23 11:24:34 UTC

- reply

K2 > Everest

2025-12-22 22:52:40 UTC

Stephen Wolfram doesn’t know the answer is Bitcoin. He’s searching for a theory, but bitcoin is an instantiation of a system that’s proves its theory every ~10 minutes. The tick of time must be the measurement. Quantized time is fundamental and required for binary logic to exist. The Ruliad must be Bitcoin.
https://youtu.be/6zShjO9Xpbo?

2025-12-22 19:43:58 UTC

- reply

https://blossom.primal.net/161b479d0043a0e89b288262d1fe221bef47076889969a4d3e639c4f9438e33c.png

2025-12-22 17:31:48 UTC

- reply

Bitcoin knows what it is because it computes time as an object. If anyone wants to know, just observe Bitcoin.

2025-12-22 17:21:20 UTC

- reply

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.

2025-12-22 16:16:25 UTC

- reply

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.
#nevent1q…qaq4

2025-12-21 02:49:05 UTC

Bitcoin is the proof that binary logic (non-contradiction) can only emerge from quantized time.
GN.

2025-12-20 04:38:01 UTC

- reply

😏

2025-12-19 17:52:18 UTC

- reply

Binary logic the*

2025-12-19 17:50:45 UTC

- reply

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.

2025-12-19 16:33:52 UTC

- reply

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.

2025-12-19 15:32:59 UTC

- reply

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.
#nevent1q…l0ry

2025-12-19 14:54:45 UTC

- reply

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.

2025-12-19 14:43:19 UTC

- reply

Just ask him this simple question. He’s literally trusting an unproven axiom, one that Bitcoin openly falsifies.
#nevent1q…y36p

2025-12-19 14:40:49 UTC

Make slab great again (it always has been great). I agree with Ondra here.
https://youtu.be/fnkPyHx92_E?

2025-12-19 14:01:43 UTC

- reply

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?

2025-12-19 13:58:15 UTC

- reply

Answer the question Will.
If time is quantized and discrete, what happens to the mathematical formalism of quantum mechanics and quantum theory?

2025-12-19 13:56:27 UTC

- reply

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.

2025-12-19 13:47:26 UTC

- reply

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.