Your paper is fundamentally flawed because it addresses nothing resembling the current dynamics at stake in Bitcoin. More precisely it ignores the incentives for miners to centralize (as they have shown to have) to mitigate propagation times. In effect your paper clearly demonstrates it is more profitable to do so under free-floating blocks and you essentially rely on their altruism to maintain the validity of your model to make decisions going forward. In short, your work might be sound from a technical standpoint but can not be used to construct security models that depend on worst-behaviours assumptions.
Relevant material:
http://pastebin.com/jFgkk8M3https://botbot.me/freenode/bitcoin-wizards/2015-08-30/?msg=48477664&page=1http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-August/010737.htmlEveryone is free to read and make their own judgment but considerable holes have been poken into Peter's work and he has often been urged to revise his conclusions. He is now parading his charts, illustration all over the forum in an attempt to obtuse the debate, confusing more impressionable users who do not have time, ability or care for validating his propositions.