You mean, all these years of typing here they always knew it was me!?!?!?
Sigh... I should have picked nicer words and watched my tone, but you know what?
When you feel lonely sometimes, you can always smile at your phone's camera and know that somebody out there knows about you, cares about you, and maybe just maybe even smiles back!

We should all know that we're never alone and those hard-drives far far away are patiently collecting information about our entire lives making us a part of what can be called a digital blueprint of humanity, even when we're gone.

An interesting fact is that the Möbius strip and the Torus are topologically related.


The Möbius ladder might help demonstrate this a bit better.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/71/Moebius-ladder-16-animated.svg

Which brings us to the Hopf fibration, that's where the fundamental existential "twist" is hidden.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/ba/Hopfkeyrings.jpg/250px-Hopfkeyrings.jpg

A couple more pages and we will finally be getting to the point of making PoW useful!

So, the existence [of the limit] would be equivalent of saying "as above, so below", which is a realization that "now" is the only time and "here" is the only place [in all of existence].



This would then be "as within, so without", which means that Earth's "nought" and Earth's "zero" are one and the same, but neither actually exists (thus strict inequality) because it's the hole in The Torus?




So, if neither "nothing" nor "everything" exists, then only the "twist" is real. I guess "the Vortex of the Torus" would be an appropriate description of Earth's numerical system then.  

Hahaha!
It reminds me of "This is gentlemen!" meme originated on reddit,
and one of the responses: "One mis-step for man, one giant leap for bull-kind."

I see. It's getting trickier down the road, as we are probably approaching some existential paradox here.

Singularity (one zero) leads to things being undefined (division by zero).
Duality (two zeroes) necessitates trinity (three zeroes) with neutral balance point between the two, or otherwise addition lacks commutativity (-1+1 != +1-1).

Maybe those "interdimensional" modifiers provide a way out of this, because placing two zeroes (or three for that matter) on a single numerical line would always necessitate something in between: (a+b)/2.

The way I look at Earth's numerical system (according to how you describe it) is more like a pair of gears or maybe even spirals placed next to each other, rather than a single numerical line. Maybe this approach doesn't require addition to be commutative, because the time arrow is always forward and every moment in existence is unique (see my signature) so there is no way to get the same perspective (number) by following two different paths (order of addition)?

I guess the following quotes by Kurt Vonnegut would be appropriate here:

"Everything is Nothing with a twist."

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/0f/24/16/0f2416cafb8738b50ab815863360a0d0.jpg

"So it goes."

So it begins... PoWers that BTC, lol



It's good that Doge managed to sneak through, we will know all the secrets anyway!

Bitcoin is the positive thing that is happening!

Governments are supposed to represent people. Bitcoin is how people roll these days. What humanity have learnt cannot be unlearnt. Blockchain DNA is proliferating!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OPR3GlpQQJA

The answer to -1+1 that I held in mind was −0⁻ + −0⁺, which would not be reducible further in Earth's numerical system, but would represent zero under conventional mathematics. This makes addition commutative:

−0⁻ + −0⁺ = −0⁺ + −0⁻ = −0  <-  not on the axis, but rather an imaginary bridge?

When it comes to subtraction, we get the following:

−0⁻ - −0⁺ = −0⁻ + −0⁻ = −0⁻
−0⁺ - −0⁻ = −0⁺ + −0⁺ = −0⁺

Subtracting polarized nought from non-polarized nought would destroy the bridge resulting in polarized nought of opposite sign. Adding it would be equivalent to subtracting with sign inverted. Subtracting polarized nought from itself should reestablish the bridge resulting in non-polarized nought.

This in fact adds a three-state modifier to all non-zero numbers as well, something that conventional mathematics didn't have due to its zero being singular (thus adding/subtracting it had no effect). It should look like this:

1 + −0⁻ = 1⁻
1 + −0⁺ = 1⁺
1 + −0  = 1

Which reminds me of the (past, present, future) modifiers used in conjunction with numbers in the new type of numerology (described here, scroll all the way down to Numerology).



In your example: -1+1 = −0⁻ < −0⁺ = +1-1  =>  -1+1 < +1-1
Does Earth's addition commute? Is strict inequality due to implied modifiers?

PS: Also you might have mixed the terms positive and negative in your description.

Let There Be Light.

You got me intrigued with Earth's numerical system. The name sounds just about right and it is hidden under layers upon layers of onion router, exactly like those zeroes loop around the infinity.

I will look into that.
Does it shake the foundations of math so badly that it gets banned if published in the open?

Also what would be the result of -1+1? Which of those inner zeroes?

We would end up in a perfect world with "designer babies" and then... Gattaca!

Um... waaat?

I like this little guy! He has some leadership skills on him too.


Recognizing and fixing the problems is exactly what we need to learn how to do and get very good at, if we're to make it into space. With Bitcoin we will!

http://www.millybee.com/images/rocket1.gif

First of all, the power players of today are not as united as we think they are. It means that for as long as we, the people, are not divided (into sub-chains), confiscation of Bitcoin's mining power locally would not result in a complete shutdown of the network. It would need to be a concerted effort and apparently not all the major participants in the geo-politics arena are interested in this.

Secondly, the power players of today might see Bitcoin as a solution to the problems of the world, which are otherwise hard to reach consensus on. The nature of PoW is such, that power players will be engaging at some point one way or another. I mean, you won't run away with your mining farm too far. The idea is then to let them embrace the rules of the game, and make the game more transparent than it used to be.

You are suggesting to use divide-and-conquer tactic and back it with historical facts demonstrating that it worked perfectly well for the conquerors. I suggest we keep united and seek for solutions together. Bitcoin is here to stir the pot and wake people up. Ding!

The evolution and proliferation of blockchain DNA is what will turn "them" into "us". The Earth will be healed and ready for the next frontier. The galaxy is waiting!

Value is a moving target.
The less people use something the less valuable it becomes.

I don't think that off-chain/side-chain stuff is the right approach, it introduces backing. It is divide-and-conquer tactics at its best. Fiat was once backed with gold, you know how that turned out. At some point people will realize: "hmm, if i can buy food with these centralized off-chain coins, why do I need those bitcoins anyway?"

I'm not saying "let's change all the rules", but we need to figure out what the rules are and what the game is. In my recent discussions on the forum I've come to believe that money is a dynamic essence. You need to keep up with the flow in order to gain and even maintain value. If Bitcoin doesn't move it will be replaced.

I knew it was gonna be controversial, but someone needed to throw that one into the discussion. Bitcoin gains its value not only from the idea of its limited supply, but also from growing adoption. People forget that. If another coin gets more traction while Bitcoin loses momentum it got from its first-mover advantage, then it will have to compete on mere technicalities, which are easy to replicate due to its open-source nature.

Thus Bitcoin needs to keep pace with the market development in order to stay relevant. The fact that PoW-secured blockchain can scale beyond 1Mb per block is not a rocket science. The question is - will it be Bitcoin or something else? If it's something else, what makes you think that Bitcoin will maintain its value?

Agreeing on increasing the block size limit is a higher priority than anything else at this point and the rest of the stuff is much further into the future anyway, so we'll get to that in time.

Adaptability to changing environment might be crucial for success of the system, the competition isn't asleep either, let the leanest and meanest honeybadger win! Evolutionists are gonna like this one .

I would consider the idea of network security stemming from activity and competition as the most fundamental principle of Bitcoin, which separates it from any other security models achieved by decree or elements thereof.

I agree that there are more secure models requiring less energy, but if it comes at a cost of having certain (groups of) people holding the keys, then we have stepped on a slippery slope.

In that regard being disinflationary is less fundamental than being protected by competition. But I'm not saying that we have to sacrifice the former in order to maintain the latter, just that it is the last resort option in case we couldn't come up with more creative solutions, which I'm sure we will .