It would be quite difficult for me to imagine how someone who has not read the book could accidentally choose such a name for himself on the forum. 
Especially since, as it seems to me, the question is important itself. The fact that in the end it turned out that John Galt appeared is not so significant. Like the question of who Satoshi Nakamoto is, the fact that this question has no definitive answer makes it more interesting for people to study the ideas that he formulated. Those who are interested in who is John Galt will somehow be able to find something interesting themselves. As I see it.
Especially since, as it seems to me, the question is important itself. The fact that in the end it turned out that John Galt appeared is not so significant. Like the question of who Satoshi Nakamoto is, the fact that this question has no definitive answer makes it more interesting for people to study the ideas that he formulated. Those who are interested in who is John Galt will somehow be able to find something interesting themselves. As I see it.You said it so well! Indeed, inside Atlas Shrugged the apparition of John Galt was not that relevant for the narrative. The society was how it was, industrial companies were they way they were; corruption was still around... Similar, finding who Satoshi is won't change much things for Bitcoin or for the world. People will still use Bitcoin -- some will do it in worst possible manner; some will do it to free themselves from banks' and governments' oppression, as Satoshi envisioned...
Anyway, Bitcoin and anarchy don't have anything to do with one another.
It seems you are making a common mistake, confusing anarchy with chaos, the absence of any rules and permissiveness. You will be closer to a correct understanding of anarchy if you view it as a capacity for self-organization. The very absence of the need for a third party as an external arbitrator and the peer-to-peer network architecture, which is actually a key feature of Bitcoin, is the true spirit of anarchy. [...]if anarchists don't need a government to function, then all anarchists are trying to blow up the White House and eat babies at night.
It's pointless to try to help people like cthecodebear or Ucy about the peaceful principles of anarchy and even more pointless to try to explain principles of crypto-anarchy. Tim May envisioned all these more than 30 years ago, but who reads his thoughts anymore...? (/s)