TheDinarian
News • Business • Investing & Finance
? The Dinarian on Locals brings you the latest in news, interviews, in-depth conversations, and stories from across the blockchain and global communities—within and beyond cryptocurrency ?. Experts delve into how blockchain technology is reshaping industries, enhancing business networks ?, transforming transaction workflows, and advancing distributed ledger systems ??. We also explore intriguing topics that may venture into the realm of conspiracies—and so much more!
Interested? Want to learn more about the community?
September 01, 2022
🌐 A NEW ERA FOR MONEY 🌐

As bytes replace dollars, euros, and renminbi, some changes will be welcome; others may not

Money has transformed human society, enabling commerce and trade even between widely dispersed geographic locations. It allows the transfer of wealth and resources across space and over time. But for much of human history, it has also been the object of rapacity and depredation.

Money is now on the cusp of a transformation that could reshape banking, finance, and even the structure of society. Most notably, the era of physical currency, or cash, is drawing to an end, even in low- and middle-income countries; the age of digital currencies has begun. A new round of competition between official and private currencies is also looming in both the domestic and international arenas. The proliferation of digital technologies that is powering this transformation could foster useful innovations and broaden access to basic financial services. But there is a risk that the technologies could intensify the concentration of economic power and allow big corporations and governments to intrude even more into our financial and private lives.

Traditional financial institutions, especially commercial banks, face challenges to their business models as new technologies give rise to online banks that can reach more customers and to web-based platforms, such as Prosper, capable of directly connecting savers and borrowers. These new institutions and platforms are intensifying competition, promoting innovation, and reducing costs. Savers are gaining access to a broader array of saving, credit, and insurance products, while small-scale entrepreneurs are able to secure financing from sources other than banks, which tend to have stringent loan-underwriting and collateral requirements. Domestic and international payments are becoming cheaper and quicker, benefiting consumers and businesses.

Stability concerns
The emergence of cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin initially seemed likely to revolutionize payments. Cryptocurrencies do not rely on central bank money or trusted intermediaries such as commercial banks and credit card companies to conduct transactions, which cuts out the inefficiencies and added costs of these intermediaries. However, their volatile prices, and constraints to transaction volumes and processing times, have rendered cryptocurrencies ineffective as mediums of exchange. New forms of cryptocurrencies called stablecoins, most of which ironically get their stable value by being backed by stores of central bank money and government securities, have gained more traction as means of payment. The blockchain technology underpinning them is catalyzing far-reaching changes to money and finance that will affect households, corporations, investors, central banks, and governments in profound ways. This technology, by allowing secure ownership of purely digital objects, is even fostering the rise of new digital assets, such as non-fungible tokens.

At the same time, central banks are concerned about the implications for both financial and economic stability if decentralized payment systems (offshoots of Bitcoin) or private stablecoins were to displace both cash and traditional payment systems managed by regulated financial institutions. A payment infrastructure that is entirely in the hands of the private sector might be efficient and cheap, but some parts of it could freeze up in the event of a loss of confidence during a period of financial turmoil. Without a functioning payment system, a modern economy would grind to a halt.

In response to such concerns, central banks are contemplating issuing digital forms of central bank money for retail payments—central bank digital currencies (CBDCs). The motives range from broadening financial inclusion (giving even those without a bank account easy access to a free digital payment system) to increasing the efficiency and stability of payment systems by creating a public payment option as a backstop (the role now played by cash).

A CBDC has other potential benefits. It would hinder illegal activities such as drug deals, money laundering, and terrorism financing that rely on anonymous cash transactions. It would bring more economic activity out of the shadows and into the formal economy, making it harder to evade taxes. Small businesses would benefit from lower transaction costs and avoid the hassles and risks of handling cash.

Risk of runs
But a CBDC also has disadvantages. For one, it poses risks to the banking system. Commercial banks are crucial to creating and distributing credit that keeps economies functioning smoothly. What if households moved their money out of regular bank accounts into central bank digital wallets, perceiving them as safer even if they pay no interest? If commercial banks were starved of deposits, a central bank could find itself in the undesirable position of having to take over the allocation of credit, deciding which sectors and firms deserve loans. In addition, a central bank retail payment system could even squelch private sector innovation aimed at making digital payments cheaper and quicker.

Of equal concern is the potential loss of privacy. Even with protections in place to ensure confidentiality, any central bank would want to keep a verifiable record of transactions to ensure that its digital currency is used only for legitimate purposes. A CBDC thus poses the risk of eventually destroying any vestige of anonymity and privacy in commercial transactions. A carefully designed CBDC, taking advantage of fast-developing technical innovations, can mitigate many of these risks. Still, for all its benefits, the prospect of eventually displacing cash with a CBDC ought not to be taken lightly.

The new technologies could make it harder for a central bank to carry out its key functions—namely, to keep unemployment and inflation low by manipulating interest rates. When a central bank such as the Federal Reserve changes its key interest rate, it affects interest rates on commercial bank deposits and loans in a way that is reasonably well understood. But if the proliferation of digital lending platforms diminishes the role of commercial banks in mediating between savers and borrowers, it’s unclear how or whether this monetary policy transmission mechanism will continue to function.

Currency competition
The basic functions of central-bank-issued money are on the threshold of change. As recently as a century ago, private currencies competed with each other and with government-issued currencies, also known as fiat money. The emergence of central banks decisively shifted the balance in favor of fiat currency, which serves as a unit of account, medium of exchange, and store of value. The advent of various forms of digital currencies, and the technology behind them, has now made it possible to separate these functions of money and has created direct competition for fiat currencies in some dimensions.

Central bank currencies are likely to retain their importance as stores of value and, for countries that issue them in digital form, also as mediums of exchange. Still, privately intermediated payment systems are likely to gain in importance, intensifying competition between various forms of private money and central bank money in their roles as mediums of exchange. If market forces are left to themselves, some issuers of money and providers of payment technologies could become dominant. Some of these changes could affect the very nature of money—how it is created, what forms it takes, and what roles it plays in the economy.

If market forces are left to themselves, some issuers of money and providers of payment technologies could become dominant.
International money flows
Novel forms of money and new channels for moving funds within and between economies will reshape international capital flows, exchange rates, and the structure of the international monetary system. Some of these changes will have big benefits; others will pose new challenges.

International financial transactions will become faster, cheaper, and more transparent. These changes will be a boon for investors seeking to diversify their portfolios, firms looking to raise money in global capital markets, and economic migrants sending money back to their home countries. Faster and cheaper cross-border payments will also boost trade, which will be particularly beneficial for emerging market and developing economies that rely on export revenues for a significant portion of their GDP.

Yet the emergence of new conduits for cross-border flows will facilitate not just international commerce but also illicit financial flows, raising new challenges for regulators and governments. It will also make it harder for governments to control the flows of legitimate investment capital across borders. This poses particular challenges for emerging market economies, which have suffered periodic economic crises as a result of large, sudden outflows of foreign capital. These economies will be even more vulnerable to the monetary policy actions of the world’s major central banks, which can trigger those capital outflows.

Digital central bank money is only as strong and credible as the institution that issues it.
Neither the advent of CBDCs nor the lowering of barriers to international financial flows will alone do much to reorder the international monetary system or the balance of power among major currencies. The cost of direct transactions between pairs of emerging market currencies is falling, reducing the need for “vehicle currencies” such as the dollar and the euro. But the major reserve currencies, especially the dollar, are likely to retain their dominance as stores of value because that dominance rests not just on the issuing country’s economic size and financial market depth but also on a strong institutional foundation that is essential for maintaining investors’ trust. Technology cannot substitute for an independent central bank and the rule of law.

Similarly, CBDCs will not solve underlying weaknesses in central bank credibility or other issues, such as a government’s undisciplined fiscal policies, that affect the value of a national currency. When a government runs large budget deficits, the presumption that the central bank might be directed to create more money to finance those deficits tends to raise inflation and reduce the purchasing power of central bank money, whether physical or digital. In other words, digital central bank money is only as strong and credible as the institution that issues it.

Government’s role
Central banks and governments worldwide face important decisions in coming years about whether to resist new financial technologies, passively accept private-sector-led innovations, or embrace the potential efficiency gains the new technologies offer. The emergence of cryptocurrencies and the prospect of CBDCs raise important questions about the role the government ought to play in financial markets, whether it is impinging on areas that are preferably left to the private sector, and whether it can compensate for market failures, particularly the large number of unbanked and underbanked households in developing economies and even in advanced economies such as the United States.

As the recent cryptocurrency boom and bust have shown, regulation of this sector will be essential to maintain the integrity of payment systems and financial markets, ensure adequate investor protection, and promote financial stability. Still, given the extensive demand for more efficient payment services at the retail, wholesale, and cross-border levels, private-sector-led financial innovations could generate significant benefits for households and corporations. In this respect, the key challenge for central banks and financial regulators lies in balancing financial innovation with the need to mitigate risks to uninformed investors and to overall financial stability.

New financial technologies hold the promise of making it easier even for indigent households to gain access to an array of financial products and services, and of thereby democratizing finance. However, technological innovations in finance, even those that might allow for more efficient financial intermediation, could have double-edged implications for income and wealth inequality.

The benefits of innovations in financial technologies could be captured largely by the wealthy, who could use them to increase financial returns and diversify risks, and existing financial institutions could co-opt these changes for their own benefit. Moreover, because those who are economically marginalized have limited digital access and lack financial literacy, some of the changes could draw them into investment opportunities whose risks they do not fully appreciate or have the ability to tolerate. Thus, the implications for income and wealth inequality—which has risen sharply in many countries and is fomenting political and social tensions—are far from obvious.

Another key change will be greater stratification at both the national and international levels. Smaller economies and those with weak institutions could see their central banks and currencies swept away, concentrating even more economic and financial power in the hands of the large economies. Meanwhile, major corporations such as Amazon and Meta could accrete more power by controlling both commerce and finance.

Even in a world with decentralized finance built around Bitcoin’s innovative blockchain technology (which is likely to be its true legacy), governments have important roles to play in enforcing contractual and property rights, protecting investors, and ensuring financial stability. After all, it appears that cryptocurrencies and innovative financial products, too, work better when they are built on the foundation of trust that comes from government oversight and supervision. Governments have the responsibility to ensure that their laws and actions promote fair competition rather than favoring incumbents and allowing large players to stifle smaller rivals.

Continue Reading: https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/fandd/issues/2022/09/A-new-era-for-money-Prasad

Interested? Want to learn more about the community?
What else you may like

Videos
Podcasts
Posts
Articles
🔑Blockchain lowers barriers so that everyone wins🔑

With BENJI, Franklin Templeton used the Stellar network to bring its money market fund onchain, reducing the minimum investment from $2,500 to just $25.

Denelle Dixon breaks down what this means for access and inclusion on Thinking Crypto Podcast with Tony Edward.

00:00:39
đŸ€”ON FOX NEWS? One Has To Wonder... WHY NOW?đŸ€”

ARE WE ALONE? Tonight on @SpecialReport a look at a new documentary on UAP's and what government officials may know about top secret programs.

00:07:02
🚹 The convergence of crypto and traditional finance is accelerating the Internet of Value 🚹

Institutional payments. Secure asset custody. Regulated stablecoins. Everything onchain.

It's happening: the convergence of crypto and traditional finance is accelerating the Internet of Value.

That’s a wrap for Ripple Swell 2025. We’ll see you next year, NYC! đŸ—œ

00:01:41
👉 Coinbase just launched an AI agent for Crypto Trading

Custom AI assistants that print money in your sleep? 🔜

The future of Crypto x AI is about to go crazy.

👉 Here’s what you need to know:

💠 'Based Agent' enables creation of custom AI agents
💠 Users set up personalized agents in < 3 minutes
💠 Equipped w/ crypto wallet and on-chain functions
💠 Capable of completing trades, swaps, and staking
💠 Integrates with Coinbase’s SDK, OpenAI, & Replit

👉 What this means for the future of Crypto:

1. Open Access: Democratized access to advanced trading
2. Automated Txns: Complex trades + streamlined on-chain activity
3. AI Dominance: Est ~80% of crypto 👉txns done by AI agents by 2025

🚹 I personally wouldn't bet against Brian Armstrong and Jesse Pollak.

👉 Coinbase just launched an AI agent for Crypto Trading

🚹BREAKING: Swedish Treasure Hunter Dennis Asberg (@dennis_asberg) May Have Found a 60 Meter UFO on the Baltic Seafloor (With electromagnetic Anomalies, Right Angles, Corridors And It’s Not Attached To The Seabed Floor Like a Normal Geological Formation!) 🚹

World-class Swedish wreck diver Dennis Åsberg, co-founder of Ocean X, reveals 15 years of data from the Baltic Sea Anomaly–a 60 meter disc-shaped structure at 90 meters depth producing GPS failures, electromagnetic interference, perfect right-angle geometry, and a new 2025 sub-bottom profile suggesting the object is detached from the seabed. His team has retrieved biological material, burned debris, basalt (in a region where it shouldn’t exist), and recorded temperature anomalies approaching 0°C directly over the structure.

Åsberg, who has recovered Tsarist submarines, 1600s cognac shipments, and dozens of major wrecks, says this is the most anomalous discovery of his career.

1. The Discovery (2011): On a midnight sonar sweep while hunting ...

🚹3I/ATLAS Is At It Again! The Tale Of Tails

A new image out of Thailand shows something I honestly didn’t expect this late in the game. A clean sunward anti tail AND two separate tails at the same time. Here’s why this is odd:

If this were a normal comet, the anti-tail should’ve faded by now. Instead, it’s sharp, structured and persistent. So we’re down to a few possibilities:

Massive dust grains are getting blasted out in huge amounts.
Icy fragments flashing off before they ever get pushed away.
Or
 a directed jet scenario that would mean engineered thrust, not natural outgassing.
Not saying that’s the answer, just that the data keeps forcing the conversation.
The plan now is simple, we wait for the spectroscopic numbers. Natural gas moves in the hundreds of m/s. Anything in the km/s range and that’s a different story entirely.

We’re one month from closest approach on December 19.

Whatever 3I/ATLAS turns out to be
 it’s been a roller coaster of a ride so far.

Keep Your ...

Three massive stablecoin announcements in the past 48 hours ⚡

1. JPMorganChase đ—čđ—Č𝘁𝘀 𝗰đ—čđ—¶đ—Čđ—»đ˜đ˜€ đ˜€đ˜„đ—źđ—œ 𝗝𝗣𝗠𝗗 đ—łđ—Œđ—ż 𝗹𝗩𝗗𝗖 đ—Œđ—» 𝗕𝗼𝘀đ—Č

‱ JPMD = JPM's permissoned bank deposit token
‱ Previously institutions would redeem JPMD back into fiat in a bank account, staying inside of the JPM ecosystem; now they can swap between JPMD to USDC on Base, and from there hold or send
→ Meaning: Falling barrier to institutions bringing big $ onchain

2. Visa đ—œđ—¶đ—čđ—Œđ˜đ˜€ 𝘀𝘁𝗼𝗯đ—čđ—Čđ—°đ—Œđ—¶đ—» đ—œđ—źđ˜†đ—Œđ˜‚đ˜đ˜€

‱ Select partners can fund payouts in fiat to creators and gig-workers in USD-backed stablecoins
‱ "Stablecoin" was mentioned 25 times in Visa's Q4 earnings call; stablecoin-linked card spend was up 4X YoY and total settlement volume reached $2.5B annualized
→ Meaning: The largest card network in the world is speedrunning cheaper, faster global payments, now directly to...

post photo preview
post photo preview
3I/ATLAS — Secret Laws Of Gravity
Unlocking the future of space travel through the precise calculation of time and orbital trajectories.

"My preliminary analysis suggests two principal hypotheses regarding the reported phenomenon known as '3I/Atlas':

  1. A Coordinated Psychological Operation (PsyOp): The phenomenon may constitute a calculated effort to manipulate public sentiment or induce fear, potentially preceding a planned, large-scale deception (referred to informally as 'Project Bluebeam').

  2. A Highly Anomalous Object: Alternatively, the phenomenon represents an authentic, significant anomaly warranting serious scientific or intelligence scrutiny.

Regardless of its origin, '3I/Atlas' represents an historically noteworthy development that necessitates close, informed observation."

 

~Crypto Michael | The Dinarian 🙏

Abstract Introduction:

New data is now showing something that arrived early and its changing colors as we previously predicted.

In orbital mechanics where trajectories are calculated centuries in advance with accurate precision measured in seconds.

A 11-minute deviation is not a rounding error.

It’s not a typo in the database.

It’s not close enough.

"It’s Physically impossible.”

Now The longest government shutdown in U.S. history still blocking NASA releases while the object executed its closest Fly-by approaches to Mars, The Sun and Venus at the moment of maximum observational blackout.

But orbital mechanics don’t care about “government shutdowns.”

Our observations Don’t Stop.

And the math doesn’t wait for “Press releases.”

The math says this:

“If 3I/ATLAS is natural, it should have lost about 5.5 billion tons of mass.”

It didn't.

1. The 5.5 Billion Ton Problem:

Let’s start with what everyone agrees on: 3I/ATLAS “now” arrived earlier than pure gravitational predictions would allow. Even though we have been mentioning this trajectory change over 2 Weeks ago (October 21st Article HERE) TRACKING 3I/ATLAS .

The scientific consensus explanation? “Natural outgassing” the "rocket effect." As water ice sublimates near the Sun, it creates thrust, like a slow-motion rocket engine powered by evaporating ice. Comets do this all the time. It’s normal. It’s natural. It’s explainable.

Except for ONE problem.

“The Physics Don’t Add Up!”

To generate enough thrust to arrive approximately “11 minutes early” would require shedding a staggering amount of mass.

Our calculations show “over 5.5 billion tons” of gas ejected over the perihelion passage.

Think about that for a moment.

That’s not a little puff of vapor.

That’s not some gas leaking from surface cracks.

That’s 15% of the object’s total estimated mass.

If 3I/ATLAS lost that much material naturally, it would create a debris cloud larger than Jupiter’s magnetosphere—visible to amateur telescopes from Earth. Absolutely impossible to miss in professional observations, and bright enough to be catalogued by every sky survey on the planet.

1.1 ~ The Plume Paradox:

Here’s where it gets interesting:

No such cloud has yet to be observed.

Not by Hubble. Not by JWST. Not by ground-based observatories. Not by the Mars orbiters that watched it pass at 30 million kilometers.

The brightness remained within “expected limits.” The coma showed stable & geometric shifting features. The tail structure now disappeared (but that’s another story). The main one is that: “The debris cloud that should exist — simply doesn’t.”

This isn't a minor discrepancy.

This is complete, mathematical failure of the natural comet hypothesis.

Part 2: The Industrial Signature:

So if natural sublimation didn't create the thrust, what did?

The answer is hidden in the chemistry—specifically, in what shouldn’t be there. “The Nickel Anomaly.” When multiple astronomers analyzed 3I/ATLAS’s spectral signature, they found something extraordinary: “nickel vapor” (Ni) at extreme distances from the Sun, where temperatures should be far too cold for metals to vaporize naturally.

Nickel doesn't just evaporate on its own at those temperatures.

It needs HELP.

And there’s only one known process—natural or industrial—that produces a volatile nickel-carbon compound at cold temperatures which we have said several times previously;

Nickel Tetracarbonyl: Ni(CO)₄

This is not a natural cosmic process.

This is an “industrial chemical pathway” used on EARTH for metal refinement!!!

It forms at 120°C and decomposes at 180°C allowing nickel to vaporize at temperatures where water ice would remain frozen solid.

It is LITERALLY, an industrial refrigerant for metal processing.

The presence of Ni(CO)₄ in the plume tells us two things:

  • The core is not ice — It’s a nickel-rich, engineered structure.
  • The process is not passive sublimation — it’s an active, controlled system.

The nickel vapor isn’t contamination.

It’s not a coincidence.

It’s Exhaust.

3. Secret Gravity (SOEG) Model:

This is where our research team proposes something NEW.

We call it The “Self-Optimizing Ejection Guidance (SOEG) Model”

A Brand New Scientifically defensible framework that explains the acceleration not as chaotic outgassing, but as “controlled propulsion.”

The SOEG Model (Project EE / 3IE)

The System:
‱ Volatile Reservoir — CO₂ ice + Nickel-rich metallic core.
‱ Solar Heating — Perihelion triggers sublimation at optimal moment.
‱ Magnetic Ionization — Internal magnetic field ionizes nickel vapor into plasma.
‱ Anisotropic Jets — Plasma channeled through focused nozzles. (not random cracks)
‱ Thrust Optimization — Maximum momentum transfer with minimal mass loss.

Unlike natural cometary outgassing—which is chaotic, omnidirectional, and wildly inefficient. The SOEG Model Fully Represents: (CONTROLLED, DIRECTIONAL, OPTIMIZED PROPULSION.)

It’s the engineering solution to interstellar navigation: Using a “magnetofluidic drive” that uses the Sun’s + Nearby Planets & Star energy to activate a propulsion system that was BUILT.

The secret is in the magnetic field. By ionizing the nickel-carbon vapor into a high-velocity plasma jet, the system achieves thrust efficiencies that natural sublimation could never match.

This isn’t science fiction. This is “magnetohydrodynamics” the same physics that powers experimental plasma thrusters being developed by NASA and ESA for deep-space missions.

The difference?

We’re building prototypes


Someone else already perfected it.

4. The Scientific Statistical Test:

Here’s what makes it undeniable.

Natural comets exhibit HIGH temporal variance in their acceleration parameters.

Technical terms like (A₁) and (A₂) that describe how thrust changes over time. Natural outgassing is messy, chaotic & unpredictable.

Our Prediction:

We formally predict that when sufficient post-perihelion data is published — expected from JUICE observations (data release February 2026) and ground-based telescopes through December 2025— 3I/ATLAS WILL show:

  • (A₂ parameter near zero) — phase-locked rotational coherence.
  • Temporal drift < 0.5σ — stability far beyond natural variance.
  • “Thrust vector alignment” with rotational axis — body-fixed engine signature.

If ALL 3 conditions are met.

The probability that 3I/ATLAS is a natural comet drops below 0.01% (a >4σ statistical rejection).

This is not speculation. This is a time-stamped, falsifiable prediction.

By February — March 2026, we will either be proven right or wrong.

The data doesn’t care about our theories. It only cares about what actually happens.

5. The Blue Hue đŸ””:

Now there’s one more piece of evidence—and it’s visible to the naked eye (well, through a telescope). “The Color Anomaly.”

Natural comets scatter sunlight off dust particles, producing a yellowish-red glow. At 1.36 AU from the Sun, 3I/ATLAS should have appeared reddish-orange from thermal emission.

Instead, observers noted something strange: “A distinct blue fluorescence” in the coma.

What Blue Light Means?

Blue emission in a comet’s coma comes from highly ionized species—primarily “CO” (carbon monoxide ions) and certain excited metallic vapors. This requires enormous, “FOCUSED” energy to achieve.

You don’t get this level of ionization from passive solar heating. You get it from ~ Active Plasma Generation. The blue hue is the visible proof of the SOEG engine operating at perihelion. It’s the "engine glow" of a magnetofluidic drive generating high-energy plasma to achieve maximum thrust efficiency.

Compare:
- Natural comets (Hale-Bopp, NEOWISE, 67P, Etc.): Usual Yellowish-red dust scattering.
- Expected for 3I/ATLAS at 1.36 AU: Reddish-orange thermal glow.
- Observed in 3I/ATLAS: Distinct “Blue” plasma fluorescence.

This isn't subtle.

This is the difference between reflected sunlight and an active thruster firing.

5.5 ~ Convergence of Evidence:

Let's put it all together.

The Self-Optimizing Ejection Guidance (SOEG) Model is not speculation. It’s not wild theorizing. It’s one of the only frameworks that coherently explains:

✅ The early arrival— non-gravitational acceleration without natural explanation.

✅ The missing 5.5-billion-ton debris cloud — controlled thrust with minimal mass loss.

✅ The Ni(CO)₄ industrial signature — engineered propulsion chemistry.

✅ The blue plasma glow — active ionization system visible during perihelion.

✅ The statistical impossibility — phase-locked stability beyond natural variance. (pending verification)

However each piece of evidence, standing alone, is anomalous but potentially explainable.

Together, they form an interlocking pattern that demands a technological origin.

But then there’s the Silence.

Venus conjunction: Still offline.

This is not incompetence.

This is recognition.

THEY know something we’re still calculating.

December 19, 2025: 3I/ATLAS reaches closest approach to Earth at 167 million miles.

“If the calculations are correct, the 5.5-billion-ton debris cloud should be impossible to miss. Every telescope on the planet will be watching.”

All of this new information scheduled to be released should definitely include the following: High-resolution spectroscopy, morphological analysis, particle environment data and MOST CRITICALLY the astrometric parameters that will confirm or refute our SOEG model’s predictions.

“If the A₂ parameter shows phase-locked stability, the SOEG model is confirmed.”

Conclusion:

The Numbers Don’t Lie. The orbital path was not set by gravity alone. The acceleration was not powered by ice. The chemistry was not natural. And the timing is not “coincidental.”

3I/ATLAS is a message written in orbital mechanics, plasma physics, and industrial chemistry—a message we have “74 days” left to fully decode.

The mathematics are clear.

The predictions are calculated.

We don't have to speculate about what it is.

“We just have to (wait) for the complete data packet to arrive.”

And when it does, one of two things will happen:

Either the natural hypothesis survives (unlikely, given the evidence). Or we confirm what the numbers have been screaming to us since October are TRUE.

“Something pushed it. Something controlled it. Something arrived exactly when it needed to.”

Or The A-parameters will lock.

The plasma signature will confirm.

The debris cloud will be absent.

And the institutional silence will make perfect sense.

Because you don’t announce a discovery like this through a press release.

You announce it through a “Calculated Strategy.”

Analogy Conclusion:

The orbital path was set by laws that were not known,
For where the starlight failed, a force was subtly sown.

No dust and ice, but Nickel in the plume’s blue gleam,
A pulse of hidden power, of controlled, forgotten dreams.

The A-Parameter locks, The true secret of the sphere,
The Simultaneous Truth arrives, When all the numbers are near.

— Earth Exists

Additional Reference & Data Source Links đŸ–‡ïž:

EARTH EXISTS Documentation:
- [Previous article. 35 Days of Silence — 3I/ATLAS]

Source

🙏 Donations Accepted 🙏

If you find value in my content, consider showing your support via:

💳 PayPal: 
1) Simply scan the QR code below đŸ“Č
2) or visit https://www.paypal.me/thedinarian


🔗 Crypto Donations👇
XRP: r9pid4yrQgs6XSFWhMZ8NkxW3gkydWNyQX
XLM: GDMJF2OCHN3NNNX4T4F6POPBTXK23GTNSNQWUMIVKESTHMQM7XDYAIZT
XDC: xdcc2C02203C4f91375889d7AfADB09E207Edf809A6

Read full Article
post photo preview
BlackRock Is Manipulating The Price Of Bitcoin👀

Blackrock possess a strategic depth that goes far beyond initial appearances. When the general market perceives selling and traders respond with emotion, these major players are often operating on a much more profound level. They adeptly identify and leverage every available mechanism to influence market dynamics. Their power isn't in direct control of the asset, but in understanding how to move the market without ever taking direct ownership.

What entity has become the most prominent corporate champion of Bitcoin ($BTC)?

It's the one with the massive treasury holdings, known as Microstrategy.

 

However, the major strategic challenge lies here: the size of their Bitcoin position is fundamentally linked to their external financing, typically in the form of debt.

This reliance on significant debt creates an inherent vulnerability—a dependence on creditors and shareholders. When an entity's position is highly leveraged, that dependence makes them susceptible to market manipulation or strategic pressure from external financial forces.

When a highly leveraged corporate holder of a significant asset (like $BTC) faces external financial stress, that pressure inevitably transfers to the asset itself.

Blackrock's goal isn't to induce a market crash, but rather to establish a dominant position and control.

Any substantial sale of major cryptocurrencies like $BTC or $ETH initiated by Blackrock, can be interpreted not as routine trading, but as a deliberate effort to manipulate market sentiment and pricing.

Blackrock is deploying a sophisticated combination of tactics: they simultaneously generate market volatility through strategic sales of the asset ($BTC) while accumulating shares in key corporate holders (the stock symbolized by $MSTR).

The deeper intent is to leverage this equity stake to direct the corporate strategy of the highly leveraged Bitcoin champion.

With a sufficiently large ownership percentage, this influence becomes highly effective. The resulting market power is therefore a function of both manipulating price movement and controlling corporate policy.

Is Microstrategy (the company represented by the $MSTR stock) vulnerable to this kind of pressure? The evidence suggests yes.

A substantial stake held by Blackrock grants them effective leverage to influence and manipulate the company itself.

When the company's shares experience a significant decline, the leadership is often compelled to take action, potentially buying back their own stock. This action is driven by the fact that falling share prices directly intensify financial and market pressure on the entire organization.

If the stock of Microstrategy continues a sustained decline, lenders will inevitably begin to re-evaluate and revise the terms of existing loans. This is a critical point of failure for the entire strategy.

The fundamental operational model of this corporate champion works like a closed loop:

  • It secures debt financing (taking loans) to acquire $BTC.

  • Alternatively, it issues new equity (selling shares) to acquire $BTC.

Crucially, the ongoing interest payments on this substantial debt are often managed by the mechanism of issuing even more shares, creating a continuous cycle of dilution and reliance on a high stock price.

A major consequence of rising leverage is the escalating cost of borrowing, requiring Microstrategy to source even larger amounts of capital.

The most straightforward solution—to issue and sell more stock—proved to be insufficient.

In fact, the situation worsened: the company’s recent attempt to raise funds through a stock offering did not fully sell out. This failure directly resulted in a significant liquidity shortfall, hamstringing Microstrategy’s ability to meet its financial obligations and continue its asset acquisition strategy.

And the ultimate shock came when Microstrategy—the very entity that vowed it would never liquidate its holdings—began to sell.

These weren't insignificant trades; the sales were valued at billions of dollars.

The key question now becomes: Does this sudden, massive reversal signal the imminent collapse of Microstrategy, or is it simply a necessary, albeit drastic, maneuver of 'business as usual' under extreme duress?

There appear to be two primary strategic objectives behind Blackrock's calculated moves:

  • Scenario A (Direct Dominance): Blackrock aims to neutralize its most prominent competitor (the corporate Bitcoin accumulator) in order to seize the title as the largest holder of $BTC.

  • Scenario B (Indirect Control): The institution’s goal is to establish absolute market control and influence, preferring to leverage Microstrategy to execute the most aggressive or politically difficult actions.

The outright financial destruction of Microstrategy is highly improbable. Such an action would trigger a severe market crash that could take years to fully repair.

The far more intelligent strategy is integration and control.

Under this model, Microstrategy remains operational, while Blackrock secretly dictates strategy. This allows Microstrategy to absorb the market blame for any necessary but controversial manipulation, a classic and often dirty tactic used by high-powered financial entities.

In the immediate future, the market will continue to exhibit strong reactions to the strategic maneuvers of Blackrock.

When they execute sales, it instantly captures headlines, is aggressively amplified by the media, and causes fearful retail traders ('weak hands') to panic and exit their positions.

Every decrease in price that results from this panic directly translates into a superior entry point for Blackrock. This clearly illustrates that the current market environment is driven purely by emotion, making it a survival game reserved only for those with the strongest resolve.

In the long run, the nature of $BTC will likely shift, moving away from its original ideals of being completely free and decentralized.

The vast majority of the available supply is projected to become highly concentrated within a small number of major corporations and investment funds.

Consequently, the price cycles will no longer be reliably tied to events like halvings or popular narratives. Instead, they will be driven primarily by government and central bank policy decisions, overarching macroeconomic conditions, and the internal political maneuverings of the world's most dominant funds and corporations.

Blackrock's goal is not to eliminate $BTC; instead, they are focused on constructing an elaborate system of control around the asset.

Microstrategy (the stock symbolized by $MSTR) remains a powerful tool, but it now operates under terms and directives that the company's leadership no longer fully dictates.

Since direct command over the decentralized asset is impossible, control is established through strategic influence over the largest corporate and fund custodians. Moving forward, Blackrock will be the primary entity determining the market's trajectory.

🙏 Donations Accepted 🙏

If you find value in my content, consider showing your support via:

💳 PayPal: 
1) Simply scan the QR code below đŸ“Č
2) or visit https://www.paypal.me/thedinarian

🔗 Crypto Donations👇


XRP: r9pid4yrQgs6XSFWhMZ8NkxW3gkydWNyQX
XLM: GDMJF2OCHN3NNNX4T4F6POPBTXK23GTNSNQWUMIVKESTHMQM7XDYAIZT
XDC: xdcc2C02203C4f91375889d7AfADB09E207Edf809A6

Read full Article
post photo preview
A Request for NASA to Release Scientific Data on 3I/ATLAS

During my recent podcast interview with Joe Rogan (accessible here), I had mentioned the unfortunate circumstances, under which NASA had not released for four weeks the images collected by the HiRISE camera onboard the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter. These images were taken on October 2–3, 2025, when the interstellar object 3I/ATLAS passed within 30 million kilometers from Mars. The images are extremely valuable scientifically because they possess a spatial resolution of 30 kilometers per pixel, about 3 times better than the spatial resolution achieved in the best publicly available image from the Hubble Space Telescope, taken on July 21, 2025 (accessible here and analyzed here). Whereas the Hubble image was taken from an edge-on perspective since Earth and the Sun were separated by only ~10 degrees relative to distant 3I/ATLAS, the HiRISE image offers a sideways perspective, valuable in decoding the mass loss geometry and glow around as it approached the Sun.

The delay in the data release was argued to be the result of the government shutdown on October 1, 2025. Nevertheless, conspiracy theorists suggested that it may have to do with evidence for extraterrestrial intelligence in the HiRISE images. When asked about it, I suggested that the delay is probably not a sign of extraterrestrial intelligence but rather of terrestrial stupidity. We should not hold science hostage to the shutdown politics of the day. The scientific community would have greatly benefited from the dissemination of this time-sensitive data as astronomers plan follow-up observations in the coming months.

Joe Rogan suggested that I contact the interim NASA administrator, Sean Duffy. The following day, I corresponded with congresswoman Anna Paulina Luna regarding a related formal request from NASA. Following our exchange, Representative Luna wrote a brilliant letter to NASA’s acting administrator Duffy.

We all owe a debt of deep gratitude for the visionary support displayed by Representative Luna to frontier science through her letter, attached below.

Avi Loeb is the head of the Galileo Project, founding director of Harvard University’s — Black Hole Initiative, director of the Institute for Theory and Computation at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, and the former chair of the astronomy department at Harvard University (2011–2020). He is a former member of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology and a former chair of the Board on Physics and Astronomy of the National Academies. He is the bestselling author of “Extraterrestrial: The First Sign of Intelligent Life Beyond Earth” and a co-author of the textbook “Life in the Cosmos”, both published in 2021. The paperback edition of his new book, titled “Interstellar”, was published in August 2024.

Source

🙏 Donations Accepted 🙏

If you find value in my content, consider showing your support via:

💳 PayPal: 
1) Simply scan the QR code below đŸ“Č
2) or visit https://www.paypal.me/thedinarian

🔗 Crypto Donations👇
XRP: r9pid4yrQgs6XSFWhMZ8NkxW3gkydWNyQX
XLM: GDMJF2OCHN3NNNX4T4F6POPBTXK23GTNSNQWUMIVKESTHMQM7XDYAIZT
XDC: xdcc2C02203C4f91375889d7AfADB09E207Edf809A6

Read full Article
See More
Available on mobile and TV devices
google store google store app store app store
google store google store app tv store app tv store amazon store amazon store roku store roku store
Powered by Locals