Fulthunge Rani

Whatever floats your boat man. You started by saying for a currency we need the smallest base unit that is not further divisible, and the likes of Jack and you want to call it "Bitcoin". As a counter example, I said L2 further divides the base unit, which I call "sats" into "millisats", so my question is, where you draw the line of redefining the base unit? As I said, Bitcoin is deflationary currency so, in 100 years, what happens when we need micro-sats in L2? I'll give you my main summary. My point is the base unit is Bitcoin, and there is 21 million of them. You can divide it to smaller units as you want (L2, L3, maybe even soft fork L1). You can call it sats, bits, micro-sats, micro-bits, etc. Giving your example, your height is 1.90m /190 cm. You can even call it 1,900mm or 1,900,00 um etc. What you cannot do is redefine the units and say your height is 190 m, and that is the crux of the matter. In regards to using as medium of exchange, it depends on the size of the transaction. For a house price, you'll say it costs 4 bitcoin, not 400,000,000 sats. And for a milk, you'll say its costs 400 sats not 0.00000400 btc. The human mind will adopt to the correct size designation, like we use for length scale (lightyears), mass scale (amu) and time scale measurements (millenia). At this point, I am done discussing this matter any further, as its clear we have agreed to disagree.

> Half-penny and paisa were in common circulation until inflation wiped it out. cents and dimes will also go away as well given the rate of dollar inflation. > Try changing the 21Million cap and you will see that no nodes will accept it: no one wants to willingly dilute their worth. That is what I mean by Bitcoin's global truth. Bitcoin is a deflationary currency. What happens when we need units smaller than one sat? For instance, Lightning uses milli-sats. What happens to the base money then, just keep redefining the base unit? Your reductionist viewpoint doesn't bode well.

I like how how you brought quantum physics into discussion. In that case, let me bring the analogy of relativity, and compare bitcoin with speed of light, c. Bitcoin's global truth is 21 Million bitcoin. Anything else is arbitrary. And like I mentioned earlier, you cherry pick parts you like, and ignore what you don't. see below: > There were half-pennies in circulation in 1800s. Check Lyn Alden's Broken money. > Rupees have smaller units called paisa. 100 paisa = 1 rupees.

No, you are again using one truth to guide towards false claims. The SI unit of length is meters, i.e., the base unit. Angstroem is 10^-10 of the base unit. 1 meter = 10,000,000,000 Angstrom doesn't mean base unit is Angstroem.

all these big words, but what's your point? I clearly gave you a unit ratio comparison with word-pair that you say shouldn't exist in real world: Angstrom to meter. But you completely ignore it. Within the term rupees, I gave you examples of lakhs (10^5) and crores (10^7). So just like 10crores = 10,000,000 rupees, 1 bitcoin = 10,000,000 sats.

lol I just gave you the example with Angstroem and Meter. (Ratio of 1:10,000,000,000) You can call MegaSats, KiloSats, just like there is milliSats in lightning. And if you are worried by 8 zeroes instead of 9, go study eastern culture where they use Lakhs and Crores with even spaces (2 units). Stop shoving your naive take.

Drop the Angstroem. Just meter. It's cleaner. The feature size of the next gen chip goes from 1.4 Angstroem to 1.4 meters. Do you see how stupid that sounds?