it’s also alluding to the fact that Bitcoin is not only based n physics but it’s an example of quantum coherence or meaning it exists in multiple possible states simultaneously rather than collaps...
really feeling what you said here: so “quantum” is largely a marketing label.
one can guess that you must obviously know yourself that you are babbling (no grammar, being vague with saying “it” a lot) and have not at all added any clarity to it (the bitcoin lens framework).
one of their main claims is that superposition is not possible, because of a certain type of quantum description of base layer physics…if at a quantum level of physics everything is discrete in nature, superposition is impossible and so too is the quantum computers that rely on quantum descriptions of particles.
so lots of confusion happens when quantum computers are being rejected as unreal or unrealizable…but then still using quantum computing as an analogy to describe bitcoin.
one can guess that you must obviously know yourself that you are babbling (no grammar, being vague with saying “it” a lot) and have not at all added any clarity to it (the bitcoin lens framework).
one of their main claims is that superposition is not possible, because of a certain type of quantum description of base layer physics…if at a quantum level of physics everything is discrete in nature, superposition is impossible and so too is the quantum computers that rely on quantum descriptions of particles.
so lots of confusion happens when quantum computers are being rejected as unreal or unrealizable…but then still using quantum computing as an analogy to describe bitcoin.
1