This is an very informal proof, because I wanted it to be as readable as possible for the majority of readers. I hope this will finally show why Proof of Stake (PoS) is not a viable consensus design.
Ok, now please provide a formal proof for minority of readers who can't understand an informal one (e.g. me).
@kushti i think the logic used in this thread is that given that we assume A inevitably leads to B, since A is self-evident, then B is too.
It is hard to argue with that sort of logic as it allows to prove conclusively that B is true, it doesnt matter what B is, just as long as A is self-evident.
Like this:
We will assume that above absolute zero temperatures it is inevitable that the moon is made of cheese.
Since we are not all frozen at absolute zero, it is clear that the moon is made of cheese.
I think formally it would be: Assume A -> B and A is true, therefore B is true
James
Well then the burden is to prove A. Why is it assumed "self evident"?