Hi Adam, thanks for your response and for your patience.

I don’t really see the Kardashev Hinge as an idea, more an observation, sought with some faith, which I have tried to formalise so that more of us can see it.

Sorry also if I have not made the whole picture clear, I did try once in a single story but it turned into “War and Peace”, which hardly anyone read, and there were nowhere near as many pieces of the jigsaw available to describe back then, as there are now.

If we accept Bitcoin is really to be credited for driving the ongoing implementation of solar, proven by the maths and historical analysis outlined, then a lot of questions are answered.

Each Satoshi equivalent to 10mW of power, which can drive a small LED, gives us a picture something like a bunch of optical fibres, twenty one hundred-million-million of them, conducting sunlight to us, from the sun.

That works out at around 3000 fibres per person for every person on Earth, if we were to divide up the bunch equally, which of course we probably won’t, and probably shouldn’t.

We might realise though, that each Satoshi is the authorisation needed to issue a stream of some other kind(s) of tokens, by specifying the power which can be used for such.

With more Satoshis, we have more authority to issue a higher intrinsic value of tokens.

The tokens generated on such a basis then have a base intrinsic market value equivalent to the market value of the energy alone, as that is something sold in markets.

Value added to those Satoshi-generated tokens in the usual way by markets, is added to the token value.

As things progress, we would see tokens representing all kinds of individuals and projects being backed by exchange for other kinds of tokens, including those from banks, and the conventional stocks and shares of companies.

The thing to note is that any individual with Satoshis is equipped with the authority to generate tokens, up to the energy supply capacity of their Bitcoin holdings.

This is not something we would need to regulate, it is there by nature, the actual value of sunlight being realised as money.

To answer your question on economics, with infinite money guaranteed in future, we should have no fears about throwing everything we can into solar as soon as possible, nothing we could spend now is significant compared with thr rewards which will be received later.

On the question of carbon pollution that might be generated from the energy needed to implement, remember there is already enough solar power to do the remainder entirely by solar power.

On the question of when/where the sun might be available, it would be sensible to pool all energy on a worldwide grid, then all places can be powered from wherever the sun shines, at all times, no batteries needed.

With infinite money, we could choose to use superconducting technology in transmission lines, as well as hydrogen in all combustion engines, generated directly by solar power (check out “heliogen”), recyclable metals and glass instead of plastics in construction of all things, etc, etc.

If things were good enough as is, I would agree this view would be Utopian, but as things are, it is looking more and more like just “Survival”.