Exactly and what no one in physics wants to admit is why their qubits won’t stay coherent. Decoherence is a feature, not a bug; it’s thermodynamics rejecting a model that demands double spent physical states in a system where that is not allowed. The double spend problem is/was a physics problem, not just a money one. Bitcoin exposes this because it actually provides the definitions QT has never been able to define: - Existence: The irreversible commitment of energy into structure at a finite point in memory at a discrete unit of time - Time: a discrete thermodynamic tick, the collapse of Boltzmann entropy into Shannon entropy across a computational boundary - Measurement: Entropy field resolution (ie valid nonce/block commitment) - Observation: network verification, two different processes, finally disentangled. - Simultaneity occurring in the same block of time without double spent state. Once you have this framework, the modern definition of superposition collapses under its own weight. You simply cannot claim a state “exists“ in “multiple states at once” without defining the smallest meaningful “at once” and what it means to even exist. Physics has never observed/measured time at the Planck scale, yet the entire qubit model assumes a continuum that has never been observed. So we end up with a theory that quietly permits double-spent qubit states, contradictory states occupying the same nonexistent instant and then papers over the contradiction with massive error-correction, black box models. This feels more like fractional-reserve physics to me. It’s the same foundational fallacy: thinking you can model a real economy on fractionally-reserved money, and thinking you can compute a real quantum system on “fractionally-reserved qubits”. Both are illusions built on claims of “simultaneity” that have no finite denominator and no measurable grounding. This is why CQC keeps falling apart: the theory demands a level of ontological ambiguity that thermodynamics refuses to allow. Bitcoin, on the other hand, performs the transformation via verifiable discrete steps of conservation. Bitcoin falsifies their models. Until physicists are willing to confront that Bitcoin is the first system to actually compute time, measurement, and entropy, they’ll keep trying to engineer stability on top of a theory that’s fundamentally incoherent. Yet Bitcoiners keep falling for it.