@CBO this was a fun one. I think we should be more accurate with the language here. Bitcoin is not a model, or theory of a universe. Bitcoin is a universe perceived from the exterior of the temporal substrate within our universe.

As we push on the limitations of fiat knowledge, we must bend the knee to the realization that a theory of physics, a theory of time or a theory of information can NEVER explain the universe. There can never be a theory of everything. Bitcoin is not a theory of energy, a theory of time or a theory of information, it is energy, time and information instantiated thru physical computation. It’s not theoretical, it’s proof. Bitcoin is not a theory of everything; it’s an instantiation of what everything must logically, temporally, and mathematically look like from the exterior when you strip things down to the base field of information and value. Bitcoin is proof.

If you understand the formal limits that Gödel and Russell established, it should be obvious why a theory can never have explanatory power of the universe. Bitcoin formally solves Turing’s Halting problem through discrete proof of work, and supersedes the limitations of Godel and Russell by instantiating time as a process, coordinate and object. Truth can only be computed in/as time. Knowledge = Truth.

As far a phase space, the UTXO map/territory gives us an empirical reference that is not theory; each new utxo opens up a new phase space bounded by the variables of satoshi balance, fee market, spend/script type, total addresses (people to spend with) and the preference for finite bits/time. It reveals that the utxo set is always transforming, yet the base knowledge is preserved temporally and externally as physical bits. Knowledge is defined by the exterior, not the interior. The interior observes the knowledge, but creation/authorship is external to the chain. For something to remain as knowledge (the jug) it must persist in all blocks of time, it must travel through time to remain as value/knowledge in the present; it can always pay the fee of persistence in time; until it can’t.

You are right, the universe will never break into another horn, or ledger. But the reification of the same logical structure of the horn will emerge within the horn. Bitcoin is the new universe/horn within this universe, as the bits must be preserved physically here. This logic structure would demand that our universe must be fractally embedded within a similar horn preserved as physical bits across decentralized nodes (our universe is prior bitcoin), and Bitcoin/the horn/the ledger is fundamental, it’s all there will be and can be. Explanatory knowledge within explanatory knowledge, with a temporal event horizon, direction influence and authority. Time must halt, yet continue in eternity.

When we just look at the Second Law of Thermodynamics through the lens of the ledger/Bitcoin, it states that satoshis will distribute across an increasing number of UTXOs in/across time. Memory always increases, local consolidation of value is possible, but directionally it will disperse across more utxos, or bits. The satoshis (active state) will distribute across more bits in time. The density of sats per mb^2 decreases across time.

Pull it to the limit of Landauer, and there is no such thing as erasure logically for conservation to be upheld. Erase a UTXO and Bitcoin conserves nothing. Nothing universally can be erased for conservation to uphold; rather the active state transformed. This means that Landauer is measuring state change of the active “utxo” set of matter, with incomplete knowledge of the historical chain. He is measuring the phase transition from active memory/ram (utxo set) to long term enteral memory (pure bits without sats/Kelvin). We cannot see the history without Kelvin. This should be obvious, when you spend information, of course the value is gone. It is not erased, but transformed. Erasure cannot conserve logic, value thus energy. 🫡

https://fountain.fm/episode/Y19w69UuP5JQXM3z7yda

Too much travel lately. Time to get back into the groove this week by working on Bitcoin.

“This is what Satoshi realized when he designed Bitcoin and it's why only transaction fees can reliably fight spam without sacrificing any of Bitcoin's properties.”

Except with SegWit, we partially destroyed/manipulated the fee market by socializing a portion of the demand for finite blockspace out of satoshis and into permanently committed bits. Instead of allowing excess demand to be priced through fees paid in sats, we expanded the effective blocksize beyond 1MB and arbitrarily discounted certain bits paid in sats despite physical uniformity.

The additional fee market cost that should be paid in sats was socialized into bits. What should have been paid upfront by the transacting party in satoshis is now paid over the lifetime of Bitcoin by every node that must store, transmit, download, verify, and preserve those additional bits forever. Nodes must pay fees in additional bits to fight spam 🤡 the fee market is working!

We weakened the fee market’s ability to price finite blockspace and shifted part of that pricing mechanism into perpetual storage costs. The network still pays, but it pays in more bits instead of sats vs Satoshi’s1MB blocksize constant, no discounts. Those bits accrue interest indefinitely because every additional bit becomes a permanent liability carried by every future archival node. All bits have a physical cost paid in joules (Landauer + Bitcoin Lens).

Ironically, this is why node operators must be expected to “fight spam.” Under a uniform fee market, spam should be constrained primarily by price in sats by users, not nodes. But once the cost is socialized through discounted permanent memory, the burden shifts from the individual creating the demand to the nodes preserving it. We didn’t eliminate the cost, we redistributed it thru policy and fee market manipulation. How can we advocate for free markets when we manipulate our fee market economics? Look in the mirror guys.

So yes and no. The fee market was supposed to price out spam, but now nodes must pay too. At blocks up to 4MB with 4:1 discounts, we must process and store16x the amount of physical bits to price out identical behavior pre-Segwit.

We really cooked here guys. We are no better than fiat. Stop taxing nodes if you care about spam. Stop pretending like the fee market works when you had to socialize cost to nodes.

Are the nodes in control or not? Do nodes matter?

https://youtu.be/0rfhYxooZMs?

Morning vibes. These lyrics hit so damn hard.