Bitcoin Forum

Abstract
Presenting payment negotiation untouched by Natural Falsehood: F(i) = γ^(i/R) τ ∑(S_j φ^j, j=0..i)
with the Proof of Exponomial mechanism. The computer recalculates the
Exponomial calculation that was deliberately obscured:
Validation:SAI-15Checksum⇒Threshold14.47
Transactions are validated after each node produces the exact calculation.
Malicious nodes are denied through the heterodyning mechanism.
The supply time distribution is calculated as:
9,470,000→4,735,001=14.47minutes(868.2seconds)
4,735,000→1,280,000=12minutes(720seconds)
1,280,000→185,000=1.96minutes(36.9132653seconds)
185,000→0=18.8332986seconds

Superior Cryptographic Code Algorithm Inevitable 256 Needs to be retested and revised if needed, https://github.com/FarrelAlFeshalReal/SYAMAILCOIN https://github.com/FarrelAlFeshalReal/SYAMAILCOIN/issues/1 and keep in mind that I have no intention of becoming the Owner of Genesis except an Investor, I give from my abilities.

Cool that you're building, but right now this reads like marketing math, not a spec.

I can't tell how the network orders transactions, who gets to produce blocks, or how Sybil resistance works.

The supply timing math has inconsistencies. 1.96 minutes is 117.6 seconds, not 36.9. If the units wobble, nobody will trust the rest.

New crypto primitive names set off alarms. If "SAI 256" is not a well-studied hash (e.g., SHA-256, BLAKE3), do not roll your own. Use boring, audited primitives. "Exact calculation at each node" is not a consensus rule by itself. You need a fork-choice rule, finality story, and a way to handle network delays and byzantine peers.

"Heterodyning mechanism" is a radio term. If you mean a mix function or penalty schedule, spell out the algorithm step-by-step.

If you want meaningful feedback, ship a minimal, boring spec:
- What is the ledger model: UTXO or account?
- Block header fields, block interval target, and difficulty/weight adjustment formula.
- How block producers are chosen and what resource is costly (work, stake, VRF lottery, something else).
- Fork-choice rule and finality.
- Transaction format, signature scheme, and fee mechanics.
- Emission schedule with units and test vectors.
- Security assumptions and threat model.
- Reference implementation with deterministic tests, plus a 5-node local testnet script.

Personal note: I spent a week in 2013 helping a coin that used clever algebra but no clear fork-choice. It split into two heaviest-ish subnets and never recovered. Don't repeat that. Make the rules measurable and dull so independent devs can implement them the same way.

Last, if you post wallets or binaries, publish reproducible builds and checksums and keep keys offline. People will try your code in VMs first; make that easy.

Clean up the math, write the spec in plain English with equations anyone can reimplement, and I'll take another pass.

I have revised and used Cryptography which should have been tested, you can look back at it in the https://github.com/FarrelAlFeshalReal/SYAMAILCOIN