Bitcoin: The Architecture of Time - Jack Klucznik & Nicholas Marino | Ep.162

0:00Bitcoin is not a theory of physics because it exists. It's real. It's animated with energy. It's not a theory. It is matter. You'll never solve physics with a theory. A theory can never describe it because it needs to be the thing itself. So you saying that Bitcoin is essentially a truth about time? The question is more, is time the tool that consciousness uses to cause the order it's sense of what is? We think we understand what money is, but money must solely be defined by Bitcoin. Like, let's just say we've never had true, perfect money until Bitcoin, so we've never had money. We're really saying like Bitcoin gives us the science of philosophy. It's like, it's giving us something beneath philosophy now as this is the bedrock of truth. Now all questions must pass through this lens. And in my opinion, like we are the creators of the ledger. Like we're actively writing it. And so co-creators, right? So if you believe in God, like God is speaking us into existence.

1:02And therefore he's helping us speak Bitcoin into existence through us. If Bitcoin is truly the interpretation of what a quantum computer is, then we need to take the people trying to change Bitcoin's code and upgrade it for quantum as a threat to Bitcoin. Bitcoin is the truth. It doesn't need to prove itself. Hello and welcome to another episode of You're the Voice, a flat from New Hampshire. Lake Winnipezaki, Sandy Island. Have the pleasure of being here with my two friends, Jack and Nick. How are you guys? Excellent. We've lost it hanging out with all these Bitcoin. It's too much knowledge here. Too much signal. Too much signal, right? All right. I have no fucking clue how this episode is going to turn out. But I am quite curious to see what's going to happen within 60 minutes.

2:06And isn't it ironic that we started by counting time? Because I think most of this conversation is going to revolve around time, which is a subject or a topic that I am fascinated by. Do not know how to explain it as well as you guys. So thank you for coming on the show to help me try and make sense of this concept. And I'll start with a quick intro for those of you who don't know, Jack and Nick or Nicholas. They're the co-authors of Bitcoin, the architecture of time, which is this little little piece of work here, only 244 pages. Or so it's a paper that you guys have put together recently, right? Over a few years, over a few years, but released recently. Yes, in red and third. And you're researching and exploring Bitcoin through the lens of theoretical physics, entropy, and quantized time. And I have watched your talk in Vegas. I've watched your brilliant episode

3:08with Jeff and Preston. And we had a bit of back and forth on some of the ideas that came up in those episodes, some of the ideas that I've brought up recently with Jeff in my fireside chat with him in Prague. We talked a bit about consciousness and how it ties into what you guys are doing. I am very curious about the intersection of physics and spirituality more because I am quite a spiritual person that is inquiring or exploring the nature of our reality, our physical reality, which in many instances I feel that the physical reality is lacking some explanations or some ways to capture what I can sense in the spiritual realm. And we do have a gap there because we can feel stuff. And most people, when they talk about reality, they talk about

4:10the five senses. And in our third dimension reality, we can only capture that much through our hearing or eyesight, smell, etc. But we are oftentimes discrediting the, I would say the sixth sense of energy, consciousness, you know, the third eye, what we can feel, what we sometimes know to be true but don't have a way to prove it or a way to use language. And we're also competing against modern language. Because like terms that were made a long, long time ago, the definition in modern times has shifted from what the original authors of certain words that we still use today. So it's almost like our words are kind of double spent. It's original, yeah, and then this modernity meaning. Right. And so it's a struggle to understand when we talk to each other. Correct. Part of the, like, what we wrote in the paper is like, this is also a language problem. And so it's

5:12it's an attempt to use Bitcoin as like the shared language for us to begin to talk through as like especially when you're going into the physics side, it feels like the language around quantum physics is very monopolized and it's very abstract and most people can't relate to it. So we can use Bitcoin as more of a empirical form of language that we can also, we all can look at and agree upon and see the mechanics. And so that was like noted in the paper that this is also serving as partially like a language project because we need to be able to communicate these ideas with people. And Bitcoin is ultimately a form of communication. Fantastic. I love it. Okay. So let's start with the paper. So the genesis of the paper. Most Bitcoin research starts with economics or code, like the technology side of Bitcoin. Your starts with physics. What was the moment that you guys realized that Bitcoin was saying something about the nature of time itself? So I think we think we both saw it from almost like opposite sides of the spectrum. Even though we do say physics because

6:14we're trying to bring it to an empirical place. It's also obviously equally philosophy and a reinterpretation of what is our foundational philosophy. So you could say that I maybe tried to apply a lot of questioning and philosophical rethinking. And then with Jack, go back and forth on like how could we map that to the physics that we've inherited? And that became a long, long many times over discussion of like what is Bitcoin? How is it true objectively valuable versus this subjective US dollar value? So we tried to really dig into understanding what is the direct relationship between energy and Bitcoin. And that I would say is the foundation of our discussions is what's the relationship between energy which seems to be everything? We are composed of energy. And then witnessing Bitcoin kind of be that. And then obviously there's other people in the space. Michael

7:17Sailor specifically obviously came to public attention really hitting the drumbeat that Bitcoin is digital energy for many years. I think that shifted a little bit in recent times. But I think we need to revisit that and explore if we're going to call it digital energy, what are we actually saying? Do you want to add something? Because the next question is what are we actually saying? Yeah, Michael Sailor was extremely influential on me. He was like the first person to really speak my language. So I have like a very math engineering background. So I see Bitcoin more from like the high level system of like the whole system and looking at the mechanics of it. And so I inherently had this intuition that it was energy. And we're talking about Bitcoin as money. And so it's a pretty objective that energy has economics. And so we have a proof of work system that anchors Bitcoin energy. And we realize, oh, nobody has actually done the work to quantify the energy and understand it. Do that lens. We have like the hashed like the hash side of things in terms of like the

8:19hash rate. But we said there's something more objective here that's going on. And just looking at Bitcoin, we see a like a physical process. And we're just trying to be like, okay, there's a physical process here. Can we map any part of physics to this process going from energy to information? Has like a physical transformation that happens when? Yeah, like an isomorphism. So it's going from one state to the other. And we say, oh, so it's like going from energy to information. And like one of the things we were saying is like, well, if Bitcoin conserves our value as money, well, then it conserves energy. It conserves time, conserves information. So it's like, those are some interesting words like the conservation of information. Like we really hear about the conservation of energy, not the conservation of information. And so we had to kind of try to build a framework to put this all together and to just think about it differently from a different perspective. And I come from the side that talking about Bitcoin through the lens of FIA is inherently destructive to the goal of Bitcoin.

9:22And so this was a inevitable process that needed to happen. And this is just the, we'll call it the first like attempt to understand Bitcoin at a much higher level. And the complexity that can emerge from this understanding is seemingly limitless at the moment. She's kind of scary. So what does it mean for us? Yeah, overwhelming and really scary. But yeah, it's like endless where we can go with this. And we're just like scratching the beginning of the surface. Yeah. So what does it mean to have energy as the basis for everything when it comes to Bitcoin? I mean, number one, I think it gives us a completely different perception of what we think we're interacting with. And therefore, what is the intention behind our interactions with it? What's the most? What do we think that we're interacting with? Well, if it's energy, right? It's like you're interacting with energy in a specific medium that we've never had before. And apparently it's

10:22preserved and you can transmit this anywhere to anyone. So is it more important to define it through the definition of legacy money that we've all inherited? And that's what money is. Or is it this Bitcoin give us like fundamentally from the ground up new interpretation of what money truly is? Which is digital energy? For our new interpretation of what energy is? Okay, say more. Well, even in just the term digital energy, I was even thinking consistently, perhaps we have a misunderstanding of what digital reality is. I think it was this thing in our phone. Uh-huh, yeah. But maybe digital, maybe that's not even the right word, like computational reality. Right. Right. Yeah. And I think of computation as like the empirical test of logical statements. And if our universe is intelligible, understandable, I think it needs to pass through the gate of computation to prove that it's logical that we can actually believe what we're telling each other is

11:23like true statements. Well, sorry, do see Bitcoin as like an empirical test for logic itself. Oof, that's good. That's deep. On October 1st and 2nd, I'll be at the Expat Money Summit. Join me if you're serious about building your plan B right now. And if you're interested in the VIP ticket to watch my panel, stick around to the end. As you may know, I've been a digital nomad for the past couple of years with the intention of finding my next home. That's exactly why this summit comes spot on for me in the middle of my own research process. I'll be speaking at a panel called Escaping the Technocratic Trap. Where is your freedom safest? The summit theme is freedom is rising in Latin America. And it's all about the region's growing opportunities over the two days of the summit. You learn about second-residencies, international real estate, offshore banking, asset protection, tax optimization, and global investing in Latin America. The summit

12:24is totally free, but you need to register in advance. The VIP ticket gives you access to unlimited replays and VIP only panels head over to ExpatMoneySummit.com and reserve your free ticket or use the code flat for 30% of the IP ticket. ExpatMoneySummit.com. Ever find yourself needing cash but refusing to sell your Bitcoin? That's real life for many Bitcoiners because most Bitcoin sales aren't financial decisions. They're liquidity decisions. And that's exactly what Latin solves. Latin is the global leader in Bitcoin backed lending. They've issued over $10 billion in loans since 2018 with a perfect track record for protecting client assets. Here's what makes Latin different. With their custody loans, your Bitcoin collateral is not lent out to generate interest. No credit checks, no monthly payments, and no penalties for early repayments. You apply in minutes and you repay whenever you want. Latin also publishes

13:29proof of reserves reports every six months with full transparency. So if your capital is in Bitcoin but your expenses are not, you still have options. Latin lets you unlock liquidity without selling your Bitcoin. Learn more at Latin.io slash afrat and get a quarter percent off your first loan. That's ledn.io slash afrat. It's all about the double spend travel. Okay. I think this is what most people have missed upon what we're talking about. The double spend problem is a mere reflection of the measurement problem in physics, which is just basically saying it's talking about the conservation of energy. And so if Bitcoin double spent, if there was a double spend in the chain, I would say Bitcoin's entire value proposition is done and Bitcoin cannot conserve our value, time, energy, whatever you want to, whatever word suits with you. And so that's inherently a necessary problem to be solved. And I would say just look around where we are.

14:35And look around what we're doing. Reality can be described as the peer-to-peer exchange of energy. And we have a model of physics that says energy or information can be in two states at once, Allah, quantum. It can be in contradictory states. But then we live in this shared experience where that's inherently not true, where we as humans know the binary where energies here or there can't be both. And so reality doesn't double spend. And if reality did double spend energy, you would break the conservation of energy. So now how do we make sense of what you say? Reality doesn't have the double spend problem. But we know that in some realities we can experience the quantum state. We can experience some things happening at the same time, some entities being in two places at the same time. Like I know of people that have those abilities. It exists. And that is very

15:37confusing. That is very wonky. How can that coexist together with the fact that what you said, if you are moving the energy to another place it doesn't exist there anymore? So how can those two things coexist at the same time? Well, as a clear example, what would you give as an idea of being in a superimposed state that you're kind of imagining? Is there any specific example? Well, it's going to sound very weird. Okay. To a lot of people. But I have experienced things like that in the past in which I feel like I have glitches in time. Like I can be here with you and all of a sudden be kind of transmuted to somewhere else and experience myself being somewhere else. But I'm still here. But I'm there at the same time. I'm not dreaming. I'm not sleeping. It can be in my waking state. That has happened to me, especially after I started taking mushrooms.

16:37I don't do it on a regular basis. But it says, if something unlocked in my consciousness, to enable experiences like that from time to time. And I don't know how to control it. I don't know to tell you when it happens, why it happens. But I can tell you I have experienced it. And to be even more weird or more interesting about that, I want time even experience that together with my boyfriend at the time that we were together. And then we both felt like we were somewhere else. So we said to each other, do you see what I see? Do you feel what I feel? And he's like, yeah, wow, this is weird. Like we're here, but we're not here. We're somewhere else. And then we were back in the same kitchen that we were. And we both had the exact same experience. And that was weird. But that happens. It's had similar experiences. Okay. So is that a good answer? Is that when you were asking? Just getting a foundation because again, it's really like you go to the cutting edge. And it's like just kind of make sure you understand what the person is actually trying to tell you, right?

17:38Maybe it's not what you're trying to get from me. No, but it helps. Okay. Maybe one just high level picture of that might be that it definitely necessitates trying to define the boundaries of what time is that we can agree upon. You know, like defining as illusion or not an illusion. Obviously, there's people across the spectrum where we have these two big absolute buckets. And there's something in between that people will kind of fall into. You know, and perhaps what you're describing is there's higher conscious state beyond your local reality. And you're tapping into a previous time chain, right? That might be one. That is really what I think. Yeah. There you go. Right. And so I think this is a way to ground the mechanical framework of kind of the boundary lines between you and this present state physically. And where you're you know, conscious anchor is actually coming from. Right. Yeah. I use the word extotemporal. Like what does that mean? That's not in this for me. Like not like you know the word extra terrestrial.

18:40Yes, extraterrestrial outside this space. But we're saying outside at this time, meaning like the universe as being thinking about the universe as like a ledger time chain. And that's really where like the physics kind of came in is we had to start thinking about solving the physics problem of like, can we just make sense of the universe through a ledgerized structure to understand both the the nature of time and energy? And so the only ledgerized structure that we have that is inherently related to time and energy is Bitcoin. And so it's all about what is a block in Bitcoin? And so I would say it's a block of time. And the idea of again, this term quantum when he says a block in Bitcoin, you can think of it as like, it's literally the quantum of time for Bitcoin. Small, measurable quantity. Right. It's not only the smallest. It's the only measure of time in Bitcoin. There's only singular blocks. And so like, it's the discrete change that the system goes to. And going back to the double spend problem, you need that block, the quantized measurement

19:46of this or that spent on spent the binary. You have a mempool, right, which is your call it your potential. And so with any UTXO, you can create a hundred transactions that all contradict each other like you could 100 times double spend that same. And none of them are real in the mempool. Like, it's not real. We'll call it all possible. What is it? It's calling a pre measured state. And so the block is the measurement process. And so that is inherently when a UTXO is being selected, you're selecting one valid chain of history that that can work. And if a double spend is in there, it's going to be rejected, right? And so you're coming down to like a binary chain of logic. And so you're looking at the collapse from potential to singular. But what's interesting about Bitcoin is that when something is unmind, like a transaction is unmind, it still exists in the mempool, right? But with Bitcoin, we're looking at what's in the block, what has been spent. And by knowing what has been spent, you know what has not been spent. So all those transactions

20:51in the mempool that exist as potential, they exist as potential still, but they are referential to their past unspent UTXO state, which is still a classical state. So it's existing as a super-posed state, but it's inherently anchored to a classical state. And so I think this is what physics is missing in terms of an interpretation because you need that block. You need that boundary to solve the double spend problem. Like without that boundary of like this or that, how does a measurement ever become real? Like how does this is what physics can't answer? It's like what is a measurement? How do we go from quantum to classical? What is the thing that does it? What's the mechanism? And looking at Bitcoin, it's saying it has to be the fundamental smallest tick of time, is the thing that is both the measurement and the conserving substrate of the classical identity. So are you also saying that Bitcoin, the system represents both classical and quantum?

21:58At the same time, it's the interpretation. So between them? This is an austronic categorized. There's two sides of the conversation. There's like, again, in the Yang, if you will. There's within the system, in terms of themselves, and then there's what's happening outside the system, that's the influence? That influence? Yeah. And influencing these solidified ticks of absolute time within its system. So to give like a little bit of context, like you have the boundary of time, and we have the human experience, right? And so what quantum is inherently measuring is if this is the boundary, they're looking backward at that boundary, and they're seeing like the state collapse. So this is like the internal perspective. Like we live inside of the universe, we live inside of time. And so we're looking at this boundary from the inside. So we're looking, we're looking kind of backwards at what's going on, and we can't see past that boundary. And then when Bitcoin flip the perspective, now we're on the other side of the boundary, looking forward into time. So now you're

23:01looking at the process of collapse from eight, you know, I call it a quantized state to a singular binary state. So you're seeing the mechanics of how that's happening. So one is internal to the system, which is I live, human experience, and the other one is external to the system. We don't exist inside of Bitcoin. We don't exist inside of the blocks of time. We exert our influence, our consciousness, our decisions is being put into it. And in Bitcoin is preserving that in the classical state. So we're seeing the same mechanical process from the other side. So one is what like physicists would say is ontological or like the true nature. And the other side is epistemological, which is the end of the generation. No, I actually know ontological because of fagine because it's so yeah, one reading is both. But it's really just giving do a do I wouldn't know if I wouldn't it's really giving us a dual perspective. We're now seeing both directions of energy coming in, energy leaving, and a measurement that's occurring. And so now we can draw like the logical mechanics

24:07of oh, this is like how time must actually function logically for conservation to exist. And so that would really mean that we have to take that understanding of a block. And we have to map that onto the smallest unit of time that physics permits, which is when you get to the quantum level is the Planck scale. And so it's like can I just ask like from your reference, like has Planck scale ever popped up in conversation? No, and today I had to go check what Planck scale is. And now I think I know it's like the boundary, right? It's like the the the the where our fear we're our classical and quantum theories kind of intersect. Okay, they break down at that moment. Both break down at Planck scale. Okay. So what that really means is that at that smallest fundamental tick, we don't know what happens. Right. And the meaning of time ceases to exist beyond that. And so what does that that's what you have in your I think it was in the paper and the show that the nonse it's in like on your website on your web page. Yeah. Yeah. And you show that yeah. Yeah. And so

25:07with the nonse in the middle. So just to give you like a little bit of like reference to that. So it's like you have the line where like the two sides intersect, right? And yeah, we'll put on screen right now that image as you speak. The left side is like all the historical UTXOs spent unspent. You're seeing the entire binary lineage that led to this very present moment. And then the other side is all of the future potential which can exist at that very moment in the intersection which is I would call the eternal present, which is the eternal present is really a boundary between the two places. And so like as a human experience, we're always like existing between the past and in the future. But like we're always right there at the middle awaiting the next block. And so if you think about a block, there is no present block. Every block is a past referential state. Like there is no present block. Like the second of block is mind is already in the past. Yeah. Exactly. And so it's it's inherently always looking backward to the past. And then the future is like

26:08a cone of possibility. And so this is like where you're getting your irreducibility and your irreversibility from, which is yeah, we can we can map some probability of the mempools to like what's going to be mine. But ultimately we don't know because you can't predict consciousness. And so in Bitcoin, the consciousness exists outside of the system. And the conscious actor is authorizing like the the measurement basically. And so it can't be predicted from within. And it can't even be predicted from without either. It's because consciousness is inherently unpredictable. And so I think that is where all irreducibility is coming from, which is we can only get it to some limit like through fees and in understanding humans. We can make these predictions is like this is this this high transaction fees likely going to get mine because people want that Bitcoin. But we don't know. You don't know. I think we deceive ourselves into like believing we can know for sure.

27:09And look at like everything's a prediction market now too. Yeah. Yeah. Now we can go there. But no, we don't need to. But I think most of my intelligent viewers will understand how this is just part of the mentality of this world and the culture of this world to try and monetize on things we don't know. And sell it sell it to people. Yeah, sell it to people as valid products. Yeah. And that's why I brought up earlier like before, you know, maybe anything is recorded. But the Eaching is an example of this is free for anybody to read. And it goes back to the okay. So let's stop say what Eaching is show the book maybe and then tell us. And it will be new like this is not in the paper. But this is definitely an influence on thought indirectly. Yeah, this is the Eaching or book of changes. This is next to me not mine. Uh-huh. No, I love this. And I

28:10also told you that Monica Breve and my friend Shoutout has introduced me to this concept and talks you know Carl Jung is quoted here. She's a big student of his teachings. So please. Yeah, tell us. Yeah, no, just tying back to what you said right there, which is how everybody's trying to monetize like knowledge and then you're dependent on deferring to somebody else for understanding to then act in the roads. Like your freedom of actually acting is dependent on what you think to be true about reality or everything's going. And this is an ancient book. This is one of the oldest texts of all of human civilization. And it seems to give foundational wisdom that is embedded into all of our modern understandings. But yeah, our modern understandings have forgotten to reference back to this and talk about these oldest texts. And so it seems like in terms of causal history like modernity is just cutting off the history from the explanation

29:14itself, right? So there's like a breakdown. And then says trust me, bro, I know yeah, I'm an expert. Yeah, going. And that's kind of where physics is. It's like the language is so monopolized and and they don't actually have an understanding of what happens at the smallest scale either because they can't measure it. And so you can pick somebody off of the street and a physicist and both have a equal probability of coming up with something novel here. And so the only way to understand physics at the fundamental level is to re-instantiate the same process. And what do I mean by that? You need to re-create, re-compute time. And so that's a big point in the story. Bitcoin is doing that all the time, right? It's in it's giving us the mechanics of one singular unit of time where what quantum is really measuring and our opinion is the well, well, quantum like in generally speaking is what's called a background parameter to all the equations. It's not the primary thing. You know, it's something that again with a

30:19continuous assumption of time that we use in our modern physics to make all of our other mathematics work. It's just this constant. I believe it originates with Newton. But it in it of itself hasn't been proven. So it's just this universal coordinate system, if you will, where all of our equations live inside of this net, instead of the net being literally part of the matter itself. So what we're trying to point to with the architecture of time is, you know, almost flipping your preconceived notion of like, you know, we say it in the paper, but like the simple picture that we've tried to describe is, you know, we've inherited space time. Space is your first word, and then time is appended to it. So it's almost like you emphasize space is the real thing, and then you add the background parameter of time to your constant. What if it was just that, but just flip the answer to it as its time space, meaning everything is made out of time

31:19and from that, it generates space, right? By the relationships of time is like these points in relationship to each other, which is kind of in essence what we believe to witness with the relationships between blocks and the UTXOs between blocks, because to generate a present block, it's referring and inferring. Got it. It's hard to grasp because it's all abstract and we cannot really see the blocks. Unless we're relating to the mempool and saying, okay, look at that visualization, but it's in cyber space and we don't really see it. Thought of first is thinking, right? Like we we talk about, you know, at the fundamental level, you have a particle and or a wave. Right? But we're already it's something we literally cannot see with our own eyes. Correct. But we're appending a physical material concept to what it is. Uh-huh. And we've created this binary of a particle, yes, a static thing, yeah, or a wave. Yes, this

32:22blocks thing. And it's like, what if it's what if it's something else? Yeah, what could we describe it as? And that's where we're trying to engage with what if in your mind, you could just replace the particle with the UTXO and imagine the UTXO in geometric terms is just a point in a graph. Right. The point in time and the point in we'll call it like key space or memory of like where where do the sats like what key owns the sats? And so you can you can like begin to map that. And I think where it gets it really breaks down is because it's kind of contradictory to the human experience. We experience the flow and we experience space first more than time. And we experience the flow of time because I mean, if you understand with the playing skill, there's 10 to the 40, 10 to the 43 or 10 to the 44 of these units in one singular seconds. So there's so many of these things in one second. So in our most powerful measurement tools are roughly 10 to the negative 22. Yeah, you can imagine we say what's happening here, but in essence, there's like more scales and

33:23information theoretically missing. Yeah. What's going on at the smallest and what our measurement is actually a bit of capture. Yeah. So what I was saying, like Bitcoin's giving us the mechanics of one singular unit of time and how logic must the how the logic must operate for conservation to be upheld. And it's like literally the smallest. You got energy, you got bits, and you got time. Like it's the smallest components of each. The logic is literally at the the minimum and the the only necessary logic that you need. And then what quantum is really measuring like in this world is now take those singular units, put them together in a chain and give it the flow. And so they're measuring like the fluid, the fluidity of time. And so it's like when you look at one singular unit, you're going to see a particle, but when you measure it across a distance, and if you're not looking at the smallest unit, you see a wave, you can build a wave from the blocks. And so it's like so there is there is no wave. The wave is animated by simply blocks, putting blocks together. And so

34:27that's like a big idea for people to chew on. And and we're just saying it's like Bitcoin is not a theory of information. Bitcoin is not a theory of physics. Because it exists. It's real. It's animated with energy. It's not a theory. It's it's a real also. It is matter like it and that's what like that's kind of where the the energy side of the discussion is really important is like if we entertain that this information has energy, then by Einstein, it has mass. And if it has mass and it's energy, it's matter. And then therefore has gravity. And so we're talking about something that's a physically real measurement that's occurring. And we're trying to understand it through a model of physics where Bitcoin is not a model. And if you if you kind of go to the limit of say, like logic or like like girdles and completeness, we don't need to go deep into there. But it basically, you'll never solve physics with a theory. A theory can never describe it

35:32because it needs to be the thing itself. It needs to it needs to explain the matter. It needs to be instantiated with the energy such that it's a self-planatory. Yes. Yeah. So are you saying that Bitcoin is essentially a truth about time? Like this is this is a way. I think it's like saying it's the proper interpretation. This is the way to prove time. Like Bitcoin can be a way to prove time to to actually show us what time is and how time operates. Your the voice is brought to you by Trezer, the original Bitcoin hardware wallet company by an earing the development of self-custody for crypto assets since 2013, empowering individuals with an open source device, enabling beginners and experts to easily and securely hold their coins. I find my Trezer super easy to use and recommend it to my friends and family. Enjoy my 5% discount on Trezer product by clicking the link in the show notes and using the code A Flat. I want to

36:34introduce you to Abundant Mines because they take a very different approach to Bitcoin mining. Most people buy Bitcoin, but the smart ones mine it straight into self-custody. With Abundant Mines you can do it without giving up your privacy. Abundant Mines was founded by Boen Christine Marie Turner, a couple who lost more than half a million dollars to providers making empty promises. Instead of walking away, they build a company that raises the industry standard and puts client first and that's why I like them. With Abundant Mines you own your machines. They never touch your Bitcoin, never skim a revenue share, and you choose your own mining pool. Their customer care is unusual, clients speak to a real person for self-custody education, privacy consulting, and even visiting their site. They serve clients from around the world, but US investors specifically enjoy a big tax benefit and 100% bonus depreciation. This is more than just mining Bitcoin. It's

37:37about freedom, privacy, and purpose. You can book a free strategy call, see how it works, and mind some of your first Bitcoin for free with a special offer for my audience. Learn more on abundantmines.com slash effort. You said yourself, the consciousness component of the narrative reality really matters to you right? It's time real or not real. Perhaps the question is more, is time the tool that consciousness uses to cause the order? It's sense of what is. You said the word truth too, and I would say it's more than the truth of time. It's like the capital T truth. People call Bitcoin a truth machine. All it can do is tell you the truth. Every single individual has its own truth. But we've never had a shared substrate of truth that we can all look at and agree upon with

38:40consensus. Bitcoin is inherently something and completely novel. It's computing truth. And that has always been something that's been. It's like it's computing the farthest form of information we've ever been to experience. Obviously, whenever we talk to each other, it's all information we're exchanging. But it's like in terms of a hierarchy, what would you say is like the hardest, most foundational information you can model your sense making out of? You said money. I'm asking. I don't know. Well, I would agree it is money. But I think our model or our definition of money is still incomplete. We think we understand what money is, but money must solely be defined by Bitcoin. Let's just say we've never had true perfect money until Bitcoin. So we've never had money. It's only an approximation of call it behaviors or nature. Everyone's pulling specific parts, but only Bitcoin can natively define it. And one key feature of Bitcoin is eternal memory.

39:46Like the money must, the memory of everything must be remembered. And if it's for guy and it breaks the entire chain, like if you pull one block out of Bitcoin, the whole system breaks. So you need eternal preservation of the entire chain, which ties back to just simply like what was the white paper about? Right? It was about solving the double spend problem. And that's an answer a new way to articulate what is necessary to solve the double spend problem, which allows us to have a deeper understanding of what the white paper was even telling all of us. Most people didn't get it. Now, I would say most people who got like saw something in it didn't see the full picture. And I think it's all of us collectively reasset like I think as we describe the coin is perfect money. We just like kind of stopped there and it's like, yep. And we're attempting to explain why it is perfect. This would also be an explanation of trying to just better understand what the original white paper was trying to articulate. But it was using obviously encryption and computational

40:50theory to as a first stab at explaining what this is to generate Bitcoin, aka solve the double spend problem. And so do you think Satoshi would have known to explain it in any other way, even if it was not written in the paper? Well, I think just a funny question. Just to predict. Yeah, of course. I think he my opinion is I leave it open ended to continue the discussions and hear it from everybody because I think everybody perception with the right like if they're authentic. Yeah, I think everybody's interpretation matters. Yeah. This is a sure this is one interpretation. But they all of the interpretations they might be said differently, but they should reach consensus. I'm like we are all seeing some unspeakable phenomena for what it is. And it's more like a feeling of gravity. This is the truest thing I could understand. Yeah, like what took your attention to Bitcoin? And I would say it's like, well, if it's energy, it has gravity. And it's like we're talking about information. So it's like that's inherently like contradictory to what we know of the physics kind

41:55of it. It's like we're we're talking about something that's purely informational, but it's like pulling our minds and our consciousness in our energy, our time is being pulled into it. And it's like we're not here on like we're here on purpose, you know what I'm saying? And so like I want to bring it back to consciousness a little bit. This is something that like for sure. Why not? So, you know, Gigi, Gigi wrote the article Bitcoin is time, right? And he he used the term and other people have used it. I'm not sure if he was the first one. He said, you know, map is the territory map equals territory. And so if you look at Bitcoin, what is it preserving? You're taking consciousness from outside the ledger. So think about the ledger as like a closed bounded system. Call it maybe a universe, maybe the closed bounded thermodynamic systems. Yeah, like ledger. And so the consciousness exists outside of it. And we exert influence into it. And we're manipulating the substrate, the UTXOs and the value within it. And so Bitcoin is preserving our intention or our preference

42:58and the action. So the the transaction and so Bitcoin's preserving that. So what is the map in the territory if it's a blueprint, it's a blueprint of our consciousness and our intentions. But what does that mean? It means authorship precedes time. And so if we exist in time, our authorship or like what's animating us that higher self or that like whatever you want to call it, God, higher self would be must be animating us from outside of time. The chain is fully written from outside. And so like there's the whole you know, in physics, they believe the measurement occurs from us by observing these particles. And like I would say if you want to give, you want to look at Bitcoin to see the absurdity of that statement, that's like saying a UTXO inside of Bitcoin is what's mining the block. We know that the work, the authority, the consciousness and the will to solve that block is purely external or extra temporal to the chain. And so we're just taking like

44:05that, like the mechanics of Bitcoin and we're just saying, okay, take that and just map it backwards onto our universe and say, okay, we live inside of some ledgerized system of pure to pure exchange of energy and something's animating us. And we are inherently reflections or the binary conservation of consciousness from the other side and it's animating us. So a lot in there. It's beautiful. No, it's great. No, you'd, it's great. What do you want to add? No, in terms of like a blueprint. Yes. Yeah. But like the idea of the map is the territory is like one of the main memes, right? And so it becomes this kind of like, I think to fully grasp it, you need to understand both. Like so what would be the opposite of a blueprint, right? Would it be the architecture? Right. Like the architecture needs a blueprint. But the blueprint is an approximation if there's no real architecture. So it's like, what about a machine that's the convergence of both the blueprint

45:11is embedded in it and it's self generating itself. Right. You know, you're talking about authorship. I'm not sure that manipulation is exactly the right word. I think we're in, you can interact with it. We can interact with words like stewards of Bitcoin. Yeah. That's based on our free will. Yeah. Right. Right. So we have the choice to interact. Absolutely. And you know, yeah. That has an impact on I would say how the chain is used and therefore how it will develop over time and therefore how will influence collective consciousness. Yeah. And I would also I would say, well, if the authorship kind of is from outside the chain, then that free will choices the nature of that free will choices from something higher as well. And that's what brings me back to what Jeff and I spoke about at the FireSide Chat and what Jeff always says. We are a bit. Is that Bitcoin's future will be determined based on our actions and our choices and intentions. If we choose to put our time and energy into that system,

46:18instead of continuing the same old that we've been doing, that will dictate a very different result of what Bitcoin will look like in the future. And that also brings me to the point of significance or meaning, do we matter? Do our actions mean anything? Right. And many people think that, you know, I'm just a drop in the ocean. This is what I do is not going to impact Bitcoin like you think about this big system. How my actions can actually, but that's the thing. Your actions and our all of our actions, the collective consciousness, is what is going to determine how this thing is going to shape up. And that's why it makes so much sense and so much significance to discover who you are and then act on your purpose or your calling because if you want to see the world in a certain way, just by virtue of shifting your attention and consciousness

47:19there, that will change already reality. Reality will look very different if you're a participant in this system in a different way. Right. So yeah. Was you say that this also like Bitcoin, I mean, people say, right, like Bitcoin is a mirror. Yeah. The reflection. Yeah, for sure. So the more we engage with trot, it's almost like trying not to use it as an objective tool to influence the external reality, but to truly understand it is influencing your internal reality. So that's where the lens comes from. So now it's like, it's kind of like it has that feedback loop to the side that you're describing, right? But it's also an interest back my. It's a lens for the mind. It's like it has a feedback loop. You know, like, yeah, I'm incomplete. My understanding is incomplete. Yeah. But it's through understanding this more fundamental logic that it allows me to not get appended to lesser models of how reality

48:24works, right? Like this is kind of like refining my grounding and anchor of what must hold true no matter what environment I happen to be perceiving. Like what holds constant and true no matter where I am in reality. What is the fundamental logic that always must remain true? And so I think that the more we study Bitcoin, the more it kind of collectively reveals it to us. Oh, beautiful. I don't even know if my questions are relevant. So you argue that physics has always treated time as a given something we study from inside. How does Bitcoin let us step outside of that? What does a block actually give us that a clock doesn't? The block gives us the mechanics of... The block gives approximation. Okay. You can explain that. Yeah. Yeah. The block gives us the singular temporal mechanics of solving the double spend problem, aka conservation itself. And so that is inherently the block is indivisible. Like you can't

49:27in a simple term, there's no half of a confirmation. You either have a full confirmation you don't. And so inherently this thing is indivisible. Like there is no meaning of time beneath the block. And so that is inherently against what physics currently believes, which is continuous time. And that really just means that time is infinitely divisible. And so we've... The model of continuous time works really well when you're talking about over like a vast number of these blocks. But when you're trying to get down to that fundamental, small... You can't break it down. You can't use continuous time because at some point you must hit that boundary at which everything changes. And so what this really means is discrete time means discrete superposition. Which means the measurement must be occurring at the smallest fundamental unit of time. And that superposition exists as potential between those ticks. And so this is exactly what Bitcoin is showing us. In the memports, but it's the opposite side of

50:29that temporal boundary. So it's the external perspective. So like if you really dig into like the measurement problem and what physics is asking for, they're like, we need to see our reality from God's perspective. We need to see it all of it. And then it will make sense. And it's like, well logically, that's never going to happen. But we can re-instantiate that same perspective by creating a new bounded system. And so physics has never had 20 million before. They've never actually had something truly finite and bounded. And so now this is like a point of reference, a closed system that we see all, you know, all 21 million. So we see in Bitcoin, we see Genesis. We have a verifiable anchor of like where the system began, Genesis. And you see all the way up to the present. You see all 2.1 quadrillion bits, sats of value. I call them bits. I like to think of them as like each satoshi is like a little dot. And you can think of them as being clumped into bigger systems of

51:31one UTXO. But like ultimately there's 2.1 quadrillion of them. And we see the entire history of when they came into being and when they will come into being. But then we see also all the states of everything leading up to that present moment. Like you see the history of everything. And so that's what physics is asking for for our universe. But it's like you can get the same understanding through Bitcoin. You have the same mechanical process of looking at a totality from the outside and being able to see the measurement process occur. And then when you realize it's like, oh well, we're actually authors of this system as well. So now it's like rather than being animated by it, we are animating it. We are now injecting our will and our desires into Bitcoin. And in my opinion, like we are the creators of the ledger. Like we're actively writing it. And so co-creators, right? So if you believe in God, like God is speaking us into existence. And therefore he's helping

52:35us speak Bitcoin into existence through us. Right? And that's a pretty crazy process. It's like, could this be what a universe looks like from the outside in terms of what's like, if you're looking at a universe, you're not inside of it. So we could throw out the idea that it might not be physical. It'd be more of like informational. Let's just crown it for a second, because no matter what, the whole point is the tools that we have access to in terms of technology. They give us a resolution on observation. And then we make our measurement of what we observe. But there's so much information missing in total terms that to your point of what is real or not real, you're still dealing with not matter. You're dealing with an information of snap seven. So no matter what in science, we're dealing with information. It's all information. So it's all information. So this is a conversation about what is the nature of information? Because in science, at the cutting edge, at the theoretical

53:37limit we're pushing on, it's just information that we're getting snapshots up. And we're inferring it from energy signals. And we're interpreting that those energy signals as describing new forms of matter. So we're trying to pull it back and be like, regardless of the matter, what is this information objectively? And what is the logic required to know that the information is real, not an aberration of your your device that is making the measurement like a clock, like a clock, right? An admiration of time that obviously we know gets out of whack with the larger scale of time. And hence we need to error correct it. So it's funny that we we do have error correction for our yeah, and like I said, it's it's it's the proof, right? That it's not a good or real measurement. It's an approximate. It's an approximate. We obviously do our best to approximate reality, but an approximation is not the same thing as reality. Do you think that one day we will be

54:38measuring time based on Bitcoin and not on clocks? Like we do today? I think measuring on clocks is extremely important for coordination. I don't really know. I think it will be like a mixture of both. Okay. In terms of like thinking in the future, I think the only way to like it won't be in human physical time, but it will be in like block time. So it's like the idea we can we can project transactions into the future deterministically at a specific, not a specific moment in time, but a specific block in time. And so it inherently changes the way we think about the human physical time of like the seconds, which coordinates us, you know, here and now. And then Bitcoin is a different point of time. It's a different reference of time. Yeah. We're so early, obviously. Oh, yeah, so early. I love that. But what I, you know, ironically, I would just tie it back to thinking through this is one of our oldest scripts. Yeah. And saying, if you actually review what it is, even though it's a mathematical framework, it's for what? And it's, this is a framework of observing time. And so I'd say in our western

55:48scientific framework, we really tackled matter and energy and getting a sense of that to predict reality, to further control matter. Whereas I'd say, you know, there's another way to think about it, where this is a, a model of how to perceive time. And what again, what is time? It's obviously causal change. And so when you're trying to make predictions about the future, what model are you using to predicts? And in what time frame, like how far out into the future, I think we're also living through obviously like inflation when we talk about money, but you know, the inflation of information and the inflation of models to basically tell you how the world works. And when it's not battling, it's here. Yeah. When that's happening, I mean, what asymmetric information as an individual, do you have over these centralized giant, you know, computer systems that are learning from you and me? Maybe that's why Bitcoin is so exciting to so many because it's like the first time we can look

56:50at a system and say, it's here and it's working and it's, it's, truth. And I would just argue. And it's not a model. It's not a model in. And we are basing so much of what we do in the world today on models. Exactly. Like, coming in, like, also Bitcoin stopped broken. Right. It works right now. And so it's like, we don't every single block, every single block mind is another sort of paracol measurement. Right. So we can say like, this is not, you have improved in this, but it's like every single block isn't an empirical measurement. Right. So it, yeah, like, okay, every single one accumulates. Right. It'll never reach 100% proof. This is just a belief. Right. Right. Well, one, one thing that's interesting too is like, you know, the word matter and matters is, is kind of interesting. So Bitcoin is really in the measurement process and through like the call at the proof of work filter, it's taking what matters. So what matters to somebody? What are they? What are they going to mean? Like, what are they willing to spend their satire? Yeah, how much are they willing to

57:51pay? Like, all of that. Yeah. What matters? And then compressing it down to what is matter? Yes. And so what does that mean? Like, it's going from what is to what is like matter definitively within the system now, within the chain because that, that new UTXO output that's created is inherently the matter of the system now. So you're going from like, preference of what matters to like, matter, and it's the same word, but it's just going across that measurement boundary. You say or perceive that kind of the way that institutions are currently set up is they kind of build a moat. And so for instance, scientific reasoning kind of isolates one half from the other. So some people talk about things that matter as a qualia. And then others talk about matters. If it's just these quantities that you can manipulate. And right now, it's almost like over our history. And now we live in modernity. We've reached this like percent, crescendo or extreme split.

58:53Or it's like one or the other. And I don't believe the opposite. But I think again, what thick one helps us understand is how they can have both. Yeah, the beautifully sent. The east, the east west of energy time. It's like, yeah, that's why we were so happy. You can't separate, you can't separate the energy from the time. They're, they're fundamentally different. They're opposite sides of the same coin. I think that's what's I think that's what's hard to understand here that I think can get simplified. But again, yes, it comes down to right now. Most of us talk about matter and energy is different phenomena. Right. And we need to study them separately. Right. And once we've studied, you're saying they're a completely understanding big point. Put them together. Beautiful. It's so beautiful to to understand. Yeah, it's it's beautiful. It's great. I love it. Okay. Why do you think it's so interesting to bring someone like forging into this conversation? Because I think he intuitively understands the same thing. You know, he does see as it had the time. I mean, or the system to see it through right rather than

59:58something we can point to. Right. I think it's trying very hard to explain the route he's lived experience of the spiritual experience he has. What's even crazier is like with Bitcoin. It's beautiful. It's just beautiful. Taking his microprocessor and you are you can help him like with Bitcoin. We're literally taking his microprocessor and doing a specific function of call it. We've had worry. And it's literally producing the system that he's inherently trying to understand with his very invention. It's a beautiful. It's crazy. And we want to see it while he's still with us. Yes, exactly. Yeah. Because that man deserves it. We're just looking for any physicist who's willing to entertain. And open. Yeah. Like willing to just suspend your disbelief. Disperiated. And here is. Yeah. And there are not many, right? We we tried to talk to one and we don't know. We don't know how it's a work in progress. Okay. What's the most common mistake physicists make when they encounter Bitcoin for the first time? I mean want. Okay. Many give us all a lot. I try to condense it down to

1:01:03to solve the double spend problem. Yeah. It doesn't live purely in the realm of a computer system. It the only way we've ever proven to solve it is by how it interacts with real world energy through the proof of work. Right. Right. So it's not isolated. It's literally intersects with our physical reality. And they think it would be just a one thermal logic. Yeah. Right. That's that you're right. That's the thing that we've tried to emphasize. Coining to bridge back to the old world of understanding. Okay. This is there's thermodynamics but what is dynamics? Right. What is the dynamics that we're yes. So we're going to thermologic. So it's like you have the logic underneath the heat. Well, it's not only that, but it's it's the mechanism of what proof of work really is. So you have like the heat and the energy signature of the energy. And then the logic is you must solve the non-sat the this the below the difficulty threshold. Yes. Yeah. And so that's like your logic gate is the difficulty and then the heat is like the non-space

1:02:06in the hashing of the non-saces both itself. So that's the thermo. That's the logic when they come together and it passes the gate. It equals chronologic. It's like a one to one map now. So now you're going from instead of energy. It's like you're going to now information. And so this information is conserved and it's inherently related to energy. Yes. And so now we're like drawing a map from energy to information. I don't know if you listen to Peter McCormick's podcast at all. He had him pen to time. He had a physicist, Melvin Vops. I did not listen to that. And they're you know they're getting into simulation theory. Okay. A lot of modernities getting out to simulation theory and we would just want to pull it back. It's like proof of stake is simulation. Proof of work is computation. It's computation theory and we already have the computation. It's called Bitcoin. We're just waiting for people to come and observe Bitcoin for what it is. Bitcoin is our waiting. Like we are all waiting for you know this moment of us to understand it. And we're

1:03:06waiting you know at least we're like hoping somebody can take the torch from us and speak it in ways that we can't. Well I think you're speaking it beautifully. I don't think you need to give the torch to anyone else. You keep just doing what you're doing. You just keep practicing. You're doing a good job. You know talking with people like Cam and getting more face to face and then just having more appearances. It's kind of helped us dial it back a little bit in terms of like trying not to get too far out there. But then the longer form like Vegas like we just got thrown into it's like such a crazy chaotic thing. And it's like 20 minutes to talk about the craziest thing, aka Bitcoin. And it's like and then they're taking small little sound bites of us with no context of how we even got to this. I know. We're we're we're tasked to talk about the end game conclusion. I apologize in the name of modern media. Yeah. And so it is what it is. The longer the longer form. But then but then people get to know you. Exactly. And they want to talk to you. Authentic like yes. Yeah. These are the conversations I need to be had. And so we're slowly just

1:04:09learning like we're learning by failure. Yeah. That's the only way to do it. Well, I think you're learning by success. It's all divinely designed. I really if I can give you one thing is this is part of your journey. This is part of the process. You need to go through these different experiences. Yeah. Like we're yeah. Yeah. It needs of course. But specifically with the work that you guys are trying to put out there or not trying you are putting out there. This is the way the world is going to become aware of you. And you need to let every opportunity have its moment have its presence so that people will know who you are and what you what you're putting out there. Getting more curious and hopefully with the amount of knowledge and understanding that you guys have that most people don't you'll be able to breach that gap and explain this to more and more people. So this is why we're doing this. Yeah. It's all divinely designed. This shouldn't be any other way. Yeah. No coincidence. Yeah. Yeah. You know, when when you get into like the

1:05:10realm of synchronicity and manifestation, it's like Bitcoin gives you the architecture of why that's true. Yes. Okay. Bitcoin has meaning, not just math. Fajiz critique of materialism is that classical machines can process syntax perfectly, but generate no new meaning because meaning requires consciousness and free will. You write that Bitcoin may be more than money. Is there a sense in which Bitcoin encodes something that can't be reduced to its algorithm? Yeah. I mean, he described it earlier indirectly too, like that's big. Okay. But when he tried to describe on the outside of Bitcoin's computationally bounded system, there's obviously conscious intention that's generating the uterus. Yes. You can't control all these individual quantized conscious choices that are getting injected into the mempool waiting to be ordered by whoever yeses the right block. Yes. Right. Yes. So there's no algorithm that'll allow you to predict the whole crystallized final

1:06:16timestamp. Yes. I love that Bitcoin is like this convergence between human and machine. And I think yeah, it's something without the human action and intention, there will be no Bitcoin. Yeah. You said so. We'll just sit there idle, right? Yeah. No one to do that. I mean, unless we just have agents transacting on sats that that is a possibility, but then but then it's not human anymore. I mean, and those agents will it will originally have to be activated by humans. So there is the issue. And that's right. Crazy tangent to go. We can get into that's one hour there. No, I want to decide something. Yeah, please. Simple. Please, please, which is related to meaning. Yes. And like a lot of people today, like you're a drop in the ocean. Like what is your meaning here? But I think this intersection that you're talking we're talking about is if that's the case, I think it's actually pretty clear

1:07:17to have an interpretation where clearly you're actually at the center of the entire process. 100% yes. Like you are directly tied to the mechanism, like your consciousness is equal to this machine. Yeah. As the machine itself. Yeah. I do think that's what Bitcoin is clearly pointing to, which completely goes against modernity's scientific worldview, which is we're just this yeah, in the great microcosm or there's not the center of the universe. The mechanistic worldview, the materialistic worldview that will take us eventually to transhumanism. We are man and machine together. No, we're not. Okay, Bitcoin maybe, but not us. We talked about the observer problem. A Fujin writes that quantum physics has no observers only actors and you you talked about it. The observer as the observer of a quantum system cannot observe without drastically

1:08:20disturbing what he observes. And then he says that's why these are actors, not not observers. Bitcoin's proof of work is similarly participatory. You can't verify the chain without engaging the chain. Do you see any connection between Bitcoin's architecture and the question of conscious agency and physical systems? I think we did answer that. Yeah, just to add maybe a little bit more context. So I like to separate the two words here observer and measurement. They're different. Okay. So in Bitcoin, the measurement is the mining process. Okay. So that is the measurement. And so observation in Bitcoin can only occur after the measurement has occurred. Measurement is mining and observation is verification. So that's what the nodes do. The nodes verify. The nodes observe. Yes. But they don't measure. The mining is what is performing the measure. So two separate things. So you can only observe something that's already been measured. And it's not the observation

1:09:20is not the measurement. They're two to date things in Bitcoin. Okay. Which is different to other systems or to the way I think that's actually giving the mechanism of what is going on physically, which means the measurement that physics is trying to understand occurs outside of our universe. And we are simply observers of the measurement. We verify what has been measured. We don't do the measurement. Okay. That goes against what quantum physics thinks right now. Okay. Interesting. And so we're not we're not talking about a model. We're talking about a literal empirical instantiation of energy. And like we can get into like, you know, what this all means for quantum and what this means for Bitcoin. Because like once you have a kind of like that whole logic, then we can begin to talk about like, okay, what's the end game of all of this? Like what are the conclusions that we can begin to make? And so discrete time breaks quantum physics.

1:10:24Quantum. It's ironic that quantizing time breaks the quantum physics. And so there are physicists who have obviously understood this. Fijin, I would assume, is one of them Wolfram is another where they're going to discrete to understand. And so it's just ironic that something that's supposed to quantize everything. When you do it to time, it breaks the model. And so that inherently, once time is discrete, it changes the nature of superposition. Because now you're talking about a discrete process rather than a continuous unitary evolution. And so without getting too deep, everyone can kind of do their own research on to like how that would maybe change what a quantum computer can be. And so I take the computation, the quantum threat, right? And that's what we're we're told to go and talk about at Vegas, you know, that was kind of like what root without getting to the end game. And none of this work was inspired by one. It's a given answer to any of that. It was simply an

1:11:28exploratory conversation of trying to deal with what is the relationship between Bitcoin and Satoshi's that, you know, people are beginning to describe as digital energy and physical energy because we know that this proof of work, mining process is literally extracting energy to create this and conserve it. Yes. And it's only through going back and forth on the relationship between these two domains, physical and digital or immaterial or if you want conceptual computational information. Yeah. So many of us were. Yes. So to finish it, if the nature of superposition has changed, then the entire prospect of we'll call it centralized quantum computing is inherently falsified. And so the then it's like, well, they're building something. What are they building? And it's like, they don't understand what they're building because they don't understand the model because their model has inherent flaws in it. They're building on top of a flaw in the model, which is the incorrect architecture of time. Okay. So if that's true that this architecture is the correct one,

1:12:34then that would mean that Bitcoin is the quantum computer. It's computing blocks of time. It's computing the state. It's performing the measurement. It's, you know, like Fijin says, the universe is a quantum computer. Well, like, what does that mean? It's like, it's the thing writing the block. So it's like Bitcoin is obviously that, but we know that the miners are like a subset of Bitcoin and they exist outside of the ledger, but they're the ones doing the measurement and doing the work. And so for layman in layman terms, most people when they think of quantum computer, they think about a super fast computer that can come in such a large. They can do computation. They're in a lab. Yes. They say it. And they get it out like powers, right? Like it's going to, it's going to, you know, solve everything. But it's inherently going to be centralized in Google's lab. Yes. It's like Bitcoin saying, no, their model is wrong. It's decentralized and it's open for anybody to use. And it's simply that we don't understand Bitcoin. So quantum computer is not about the speed in which it can work or the velocity of information

1:13:39it can handle. It's just, it's about the structure of time. It's all about it. I'm asking as a complete idiot. Just trying to understand the computation that they want to perform will never be allowed because of thermodynamics and because of the architecture of time. And so what they're trying to build is a fundamentally flawed system to begin with. Wow. And so the quantum threat in that case, well, it's like if Bitcoin is truly the interpretation of what a quantum computer is, then we need to, and this is the correct architecture, then we need to take the people trying to change Bitcoin's code and upgrade it for quantum as a threat to Bitcoin. They're telling you that Bitcoin's broken. Remember Bitcoin is that they need to convince you that it's going to be broken in the future. And the physics and the architecture of time is inherently saying something about the true nature of what a private key is. And the true nature of a private key is it, it's bounded

1:14:39by physical law. It's like you can't take that. You can't take it from me. Right. And the only way they can do it is by changing the encryption and changing the code. So it's a big fund. I think once we get past the quantum fund and realize that Bitcoin's the quantum computer, uh, it's over. Let's go. There's nothing left. What does Nikolaan add? He's sitting there. Think it's just obviously he knows again. He's just going through the final boss. And it's like, what do you mean going through the final boss? Well, quantum versus quantum as we collectively, you know, cultural zeitgeist talk about it and what it's going to it's capabilities for our future and Bitcoin. So these are obviously intersecting as different narratives about what our life, our world looks like. And obviously just like AI, you know, they can look at Bitcoin as a completely inverse technology to our current perceptions that are tempting us since we're going to have

1:15:42these superpowers to control and manipulate matter. I think that's like the promise of these these tools that are so tempting and desirable because then we believe we're in control of reality. And I think that Bitcoin is painting not just a different picture, but an inverse picture to that. So um, to fully grasp this one, you must understand its opposite. And if you don't want to hear or listen to both like I'm not here to destroy this interpretation. But I am here to give an alternative reflection. Yeah. That might not align with where all the money is being clouded into to keep it going. Where the fiat incentives are coming from and what you're allowed to study and what you're not allowed to study, you know, it was just I think there are also simpler ways to get to the same end conclusion. Okay. But like we said, we like what have tools that allows us to measure

1:16:45to a specific resolution. And then we have theories that allow us to infer to a specific resolution. So we gave, you know, two boundary conditions of empirical boundary condition 10 to the negative 22. And then theoretical boundary condition 10 to the negative 43 to negative 45. It's being on what we're talking about plank length or plank time. There's a massive separation between what we can empirically know and what we can theoretically prove. Because of that, when it comes to quantum, I've witnessed it. But over the past 20 years, a proliferation of interpretations. So there are institutions that have a specific interpretation of quantum that they're working towards try to figure out how to test and make real. But there is no test that they can come up with to further probe the theory and the limit. Because of that, there are other people who are coming up with different interpretations. So if there's a proliferation

1:17:47of interpretations, you're not getting to a consensus of what is actually happening at quantum. You're you're getting decoherence of actually us interpreting what is objectively happening at quantum. So how does that stop if fiat money is funding all of these different interpretations? That means the money is dividing up to prop up different interpretations. And the money is inherently losing its energy at the same time. Like just a quick point, a piece of paper cannot conserve energy. So therefore, a piece of paper cannot explain Bitcoin. Okay. Fiat currency cannot conserve energy. Yeah. We're talking about a system of energy and time and conservation. Then it has literally zero explanatory power of what Bitcoin is. Okay. Regardless of the fiat price, the whole point is, it's not just an inflation of the dollars. It's also an inflation of the possible theories. Yes. Now, there's all of us as individual states of consciousness taking in one of those interpretations.

1:18:50Yes. But you have a different interpretation of quantum. We have no universal way to test that my interpretation, your interpretation are the same thing. So it's trying to bring Bitcoin into the conversation and be like, this is a way to test and get to a unified kind of agreement over time. But regardless of doing that, two things will play out. Bitcoin will continue to produce blocks. Therefore gain empirical you know, evidence for its instantiation of truth. And quantum interpretations will continue to proliferate with the devalument of our current currency. Yes. Because of that, you have these two opposite forces acting on this on an outcome where Bitcoin doesn't need to prove itself. It just needs to continue to produce blocks. Bitcoin is the proof. It doesn't need to prove itself. Yes. The proof. Yes. So I think those are objective statements. I don't think those are

1:19:50interpretations about reality. I think that's what we're witnessing here. Now it's bringing them into one conversation. If that's the case, then actually over time, Bitcoin's quantum interpretation that people might adopt will gain strength with every single block produced. Whereas people's current interpretation of quantum as we're inheriting it academically. Well, we can over time because again, we cannot produce an empirical test for the mathematical abstractions. Fascinating. We hope that kind of made it. Yeah. Yeah. For me, it does. I hope that also for our audience. And really, I encourage people, if they got so far with us in this conversation, please write to us in the comments. If you have other questions, more questions or feedback or, there are some things that have been said here that you want to understand better. And maybe we can do another session just about those things. What are some of the things that you feel that in

1:20:55this conversation now, we need to cover, we haven't covered? Is there anything that is acute, that is really important that should be said for the scope of this conversation? We can do more in the future. I would love to do more. I would just like, it's not about things that we need to cover. It's more just like a message to the plebs. Yes. We need help. In a way. We need more people to take the to take what we have and either fork it or build on top of it and continue to mind additional information. Like we've given a structure and it's the first attempt. Think of it as like a a new domain of physics of like, there's something here that we can measure about Bitcoin and we haven't yet mined the knowledge yet. And so by applying the equations and beginning to look at the chain, we can inherently generate new forms of data associated with the block changes. What kind of help practically do you need? What smart mathematicians to look at this? I guess we're doing something. Tell me really in practical terms. Maybe another way to say is,

1:21:57if there ends up being a domain, a system that's actually the intersection of multiple domains, then experts who only exist in one. How can they in good faith engage with something that might relate to, but exist outside of their standard subject matter? Right? So Bitcoin has a subject matter. And that's why I consistently go back to the double spend problem is not purely a computational problem, but also a physics based problem. But if we can't articulate that to make that clear to a physicist, well, then their expertise that they could apply to helping us further refine our understanding of Bitcoin, why would they? Right? And so that's not just physics, that's mathematics, the computer information theory. Yep. So I've got like just by you speaking this off the top of my head, at least three people I know that can jump this wagon and help Dr. Jessica Rose, Brian Hershfeld

1:22:58and Natalie Meislitz, she's a data analyst, mathematician, mathematician, they're all bit corners, I'm shout out to them and they're all like understanding some of this to a certain capacity. So you do need these people to step up and say, yeah, we can work with you, like let's let's put a study group together and do stuff like that. I'm really trying to break it down to like practical terms. I think we need more people to come verify the equations and see if they agree with the equations that we put out and it's okay. If they don't agree, how can we change them and refine them to a more truthful interpretation or like the proper interpretation? Because okay. Right now, like, let's put out these equations and like maybe one or two people have even commented on them. I got it. Okay. That's very good. It can't be centralized around us. Like, consensus needs to be getting pulled outward. And so we need more people to be like, yeah, this math kind of makes sense. And I see it through this way. Like, and then let's talk about it. Okay. Like, even if you can, if you can, if you can correct us, that's good for Bitcoin. Of course.

1:24:02Of course. I mean, I wish every scientist out there these days would ask for that kind of collaboration and participation scientists have stopped doing science. They're doing more compliance than science. I wouldn't say based on my experience as well. That was just an academia, but trying to explore communities of people. And so also philosophers or philosophers in title. Yes. Like self-stated philosophers. The actual engagement of conversation. Again, as an n equals one of just going to conversion with people, it doesn't seem like people are actually doing philosophy. It seems like they're regurgitating things they learned in a philosophy class or from a philosopher from the past. Okay. And they're just restating things without actually, if we think of philosophy more as the idea of how to generate questions authentically, versus giving them questions. Like, like the stupid questions I generated during this.

1:25:05No, they're not stupid. Okay. Okay. But that is that an example. Because I have generated questions and I have not studied philosophy ever. I'm just curious. And that's why I don't really think that philosophy is really that much of an actual study. You can learn about the history of like the philosophical kind of like frameworks. But once you solidify yourself into one, how's that any different than just being an ideologist? You've decided to embed yourself in that. So I'm more saying that I think that philosophy is the willingness to be an open book. Yes. And entertain an opposite worldview and then ask questions of how would that be a plausible reality even though it doesn't map herally to my sense of true things. So I don't think it's just physics. I think it's, you know, I'm not sure a lot of people are really engaging with real philosophy. As a process as an action. Okay. It's not a subject matter. It's a way of

1:26:07conversing and exploring. I understand. And like I said, Bitcoin is like the truth machine. And so and we need to append our philosophy to truth. Yeah. It realities inherently a truthful system. Like we exist inside truth. But we've never had a shared referential point nor like a object and logic to think through. And so we're we're really saying like Bitcoin gives us the science of philosophy. It's like the it's in like, you know, it's the idea of like the science of philosophy. So it's giving us something beneath philosophy now as this is the bedrock of truth. Now all questions must pass through this lens to of thought. And are we grounding our thoughts to a truthful how truth actually emerges into the world as time. Fantastic. Yeah. Beautiful website to read that and engage with you guys. Bitcoin runs.mel. Like it's a it's a hard ask and reflect like feedback reflection.

1:27:09Imagine asking somebody to reach 220 pages of something that's so hard move. So it's hard. If you do that, here's the one we talked about. Yeah. Okay. I was so happy when we came up with that image. It was like I remember like almost a day. High space collapses into the mempool. Probableistic future. I love it. Yeah. And this is all Chinese to me. But yeah, go on. That's what I was going to say. Yeah. Like we have to live with AI. Drop it in. Drop in your LLM and just, you know, engage with with something to be nature of. Assume this to be true. What would be the implications? Yeah. And then just probe it from there from your own angle. Yeah. You know, and then engage with you guys. So where should people follow you? Yeah. Bitcoin lens.net is a website. Yes. We're not only. Yeah. Even though the, oh, there's like such a pull to go back to X. But it's like, I have no desire to go there. It's okay. They can DM me on X. So I will guide them. We want to

1:28:09write a conversation in NOSU because like I don't, I don't really care about what you on musk is doing. Oh me neither. Yeah. Go on. But unfortunately, that's where a lot of the conversation is. So it's it's kind of a battle of like where do we host this discussion? Because. No, serious people that want to engage with you will find you. Yeah. We'll put a link to the website. We'll put a link to your NOSTER both of you. So guys, I want to thank you for being so interesting, so great. I know that it's not easy to and take your baby, your work of a few years and putting it out there and engaging in conversations about it, especially when you feel like what you have to show or talk about is so so nascent and so different to so many people. I know it's not easy. So could us do you on that? If I can support with anything, let me know. Could us to Jeff that introduced me to you guys and I would love to do more in the future and support you in any way I can.

1:29:13Yes. Thank you so much. Have a great rest of your day. Thank you for entertaining the conversation with us. Of course. I'm doing my best. I hope it was okay. No, there's more than most people give us. So of course. Like I said, good faith, authentic conversation between period appears. Yes, let's go. It was really a pleasure. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks for being with us. Please take a minute to give this episode a like, comment and subscribe and hit the notification bell to be notified when I release my next episode. All this really helps me beat the suppression of the algorithms. Take a moment to check my sponsors and affiliation offers in the show notes. That's how you support me and the show ensuring I can carry on with my mission. Lastly, please share this with your friends so they can also get value and choose to take some positive action. Till next time.