I’m not disputing phenomena. What I’m saying is that Bitcoin falsifies the models those phenomena are embedded in, not the observations themselves.
You’ve sidestepped my point: divide a Bitcoin block into a smaller unit of time. You can’t. There is no sub-block temporal state that is valid, verifiable, or meaningful. The block is an atomic temporal object. If you don’t understand the object, you don’t understand what it implies for any theory built on time.
The formalism assumes continuous time (infinitely divisible) to define evolution, superposition, and coherence. Bitcoin shows that a real, working system of irreversible state change requires discrete time. That doesn’t make interference disappear, it means the mathematics describing it is an approximation, not fundamental.
So I’ll reassert that Bitcoin falsifies the assumption that reality needs continuous time to be explained.
Login to reply
Replies (2)
Bam. There it is. 👊
More will understand this as will be required in the (near) future.
Thx Jack….
"So I’ll reassert that Bitcoin falsifies the assumption that reality needs continuous time to be explained."
LOL wut...? Bitcoin doesn't "falsify" anything about the nature of reality. It's not some CERN experiment. It's a serialized data structure. Of course it can be "subdivided", even at the abstraction level, into smaller units of data.
That doesn't prove anything about the nature of QM.