Jackkluz on Nostr: 1) Quantum mechanics claims wavefunctions collapse upon observation but never defines ...
1) Quantum mechanics claims wavefunctions collapse upon observation but never defines the observer.
Who collapses the state in your quantum model — and why should we trust them?
2) In physics, truth is declared by institutional consensus, not proof of work.
If truth is physical like Bitcoin, why isn’t it enforced thermodynamically?
3) Kelvin presumes an absolute scale without a total entropy reference. Bitcoin temperature is relative to total supply bounded, measurable, and finite.
Why do you believe in absolute temperature without a defined system boundary?
4) Quantum computing assumes deterministic readouts, but relies on trusted measurement.
If your quantum computer outputs certainty, who enforces the collapse without bias?
5) Quantum gravity remains unresolved; spacetime curvature resists quantization.
What if time and structure are outputs of entropy resolution, not inputs?
6) Why do Bitcoiners follow a trust don’t verify standard regarding what physicists claim is true regarding centralized quantum computing? Is centralized quantum computing purely FUD and a physiological attack on Bitcoiners and developers to induce a fork without a real threat?
7) If Bitcoin fixes our physics and computes a literal quantum, is it not the quantum computer?
8) If academia economists were wrong about Bitcoin and it is the quantum computer, would academia physicists also be wrong? Was does it mean to merge “money” with the conservation of energy?
9) Why does a utxo embody all attributes of a particle? Why is a block identical to Planck time with respect to each domain?
10) why does Bitcoin and its language make quantum mechanics logically simple for anyone to understand, but academia physicists hide behind complex theorems on false assumptions and abstract/vague semantics? Bitcoin pokes too many holes in our assumptions claimed to be “true”
Who collapses the state in your quantum model — and why should we trust them?
2) In physics, truth is declared by institutional consensus, not proof of work.
If truth is physical like Bitcoin, why isn’t it enforced thermodynamically?
3) Kelvin presumes an absolute scale without a total entropy reference. Bitcoin temperature is relative to total supply bounded, measurable, and finite.
Why do you believe in absolute temperature without a defined system boundary?
4) Quantum computing assumes deterministic readouts, but relies on trusted measurement.
If your quantum computer outputs certainty, who enforces the collapse without bias?
5) Quantum gravity remains unresolved; spacetime curvature resists quantization.
What if time and structure are outputs of entropy resolution, not inputs?
6) Why do Bitcoiners follow a trust don’t verify standard regarding what physicists claim is true regarding centralized quantum computing? Is centralized quantum computing purely FUD and a physiological attack on Bitcoiners and developers to induce a fork without a real threat?
7) If Bitcoin fixes our physics and computes a literal quantum, is it not the quantum computer?
8) If academia economists were wrong about Bitcoin and it is the quantum computer, would academia physicists also be wrong? Was does it mean to merge “money” with the conservation of energy?
9) Why does a utxo embody all attributes of a particle? Why is a block identical to Planck time with respect to each domain?
10) why does Bitcoin and its language make quantum mechanics logically simple for anyone to understand, but academia physicists hide behind complex theorems on false assumptions and abstract/vague semantics? Bitcoin pokes too many holes in our assumptions claimed to be “true”