Have been researching QC's and bitcoin for months. It is not clear from many sources of the World Wide Web whether or not QC is a threat to the sha256 of Bitcoin.
1.Can we if possible mine more than the specified value of BTC in less than a minute with the help of a powerfully-eligible Quantum Computer?
Agree that QC's can destroy Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm and steal our private keys. So considering all of the above threats,
2.Is it possible to fork Bitcoin and solve the following problems?
3.How to secure the SHA256 encryption and make it immutable to QC attacks?
I am pretty sure, Satoshi Nakamoto must have thought about the possible problems there has to be a solution, but exactly where?
1.Can we if possible mine more than the specified value of BTC in less than a minute with the help of a powerfully-eligible Quantum Computer?
Agree that QC's can destroy Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm and steal our private keys. So considering all of the above threats,
2.Is it possible to fork Bitcoin and solve the following problems?
3.How to secure the SHA256 encryption and make it immutable to QC attacks?
I am pretty sure, Satoshi Nakamoto must have thought about the possible problems there has to be a solution, but exactly where?
Researching for months but didn't somehow come across this?
SHA-256 is very strong. It's not like the incremental step from MD5 to SHA1. It can last several decades unless there's some massive breakthrough attack.
If SHA-256 became completely broken, I think we could come to some agreement about what the honest block chain was before the trouble started, lock that in and continue from there with a new hash function.
If the hash breakdown came gradually, we could transition to a new hash in an orderly way. The software would be programmed to start using a new hash after a certain block number. Everyone would have to upgrade by that time. The software could save the new hash of all the old blocks to make sure a different block with the same old hash can't be used.
If SHA-256 became completely broken, I think we could come to some agreement about what the honest block chain was before the trouble started, lock that in and continue from there with a new hash function.
If the hash breakdown came gradually, we could transition to a new hash in an orderly way. The software would be programmed to start using a new hash after a certain block number. Everyone would have to upgrade by that time. The software could save the new hash of all the old blocks to make sure a different block with the same old hash can't be used.
...