Quote from: o_e_l_e_o on Today at 09:06:57 AM

Quote from: franky1 on August 16, 2021, 09:22:11 PM

-snip-

Your entire analogy is flawed because the banana is not being made bigger.

you really do not understand your own analogy.
remember in bitcoin base code, in raw data..
there is not btc.. no banana

when you finally admit or realise or remember that the actual unit of account at binary is

100101010000001011111001000000 ( you refer to it as 8decimal 6.25btc)
and you want to change that into
1001000110000100111001110010101000000000 (11 decimal 6.25btc)

you can clearly see the binary number(banana) is bigger(MORE significant figures)

just because you want to say the human converted basket term still says "6.25 bananas' does not mean the banana is the same size

it means there are more binary numbers to share
emphasis TO SHARE
emphasis SHARE
emphasis less scarce

again
it doesnt matter if the HUMAN converted basket term is
from
100101010000001011111001000000 (standard 6.25btc or 625000000sat)
becoming
1001000110000100111001110010101000000000= 625000000000msat
or
1001000110000100111001110010101000000000=6250btc(625000000000sat)

its the same shareable units

you concentrating on "same bitcoin" is nonsense stupidity of misunderstanding because even you should know that at data level of shareable units from 2009 is not the same unit as the human GUI basket term

its like trying to explain the 10min blocktime (human expression) is not the same as the 2016 block /fortnight rule

you can pretend that its the same banana same size
but when changing
100101010000001011111001000000 to 1001000110000100111001110010101000000000
does then require
btc= 625000000/100,000,000
becoming
btc= 625000000000/100,000,000,000