TheDinarian
News • Business • Investing & Finance
XRPL’s New AMM
April 24, 2023
post photo preview

In early 2022, Ripple proposed a novel automated market maker (AMM) design for the XRP Ledger. It has subsequently been implemented on a devnet, with a mainnet launch being contingent upon governance approval of a proposal that will be shared at a later date.

Unlike traditional blockchain-based AMMs (such as Ethereum-based AMMs), it integrates directly into the XRPL itself as a core primitive. This makes it a fundamental building block of the XRP Ledger and supports Ripple’s goal of providing XRPL developers with the resources and tools needed to grow the ecosystem.

It’s worth noting that the XRPL is an open-source blockchain that is independent of Ripple, with Ripple managing approximately 4% of validators.

In this article, I will provide a high-level overview of this new AMM. In particular, I will explain five key features that distinguish it:

  1. Protocol-Native AMM: protocol-wide liquidity pools mean that liquidity is shared at a blockchain level. This makes it easy for developers to integrate AMM functionality into their projects, removing pain points such as liquidity bootstrapping.
  2. No MEV or Front-Running: federated consensus and canonical transaction ordering eliminate MEV and front-running. Both terms will be explained in detail below.
  3. Single-Sided Liquidity Provisioning: most liquidity pools require 2 tokens to be deposited at a 1:1 ratio. The XRPL’s AMM requires only a single asset, with the protocol automatically swapping the token in order to maintain a 1:1 ratio.
  4. Central Limit Order Book Integration: both AMM pricing and order book pricing are enabled on the XRPL, with the best price being automatically executed for users.
  5. Continuous Auction: arbitrageurs may bid for 24-hour trading slots for the AMM with near-zero fees, allowing them to immediately bring prices back to equilibrium with external markets and resulting in greater profitability. Liquidity providers are also compensated through the distribution of winning bid amounts for each AMM pool, mitigating impermanent loss exposure.

Below I’ll explain each in-depth, and do my best to provide an opinion on the validity of each idea.

A Protocol-Native AMM

One of the biggest challenges faced by decentralized exchanges (DEXs) is attracting liquidity. Therefore, it’s common for DEXs (who typically rely upon AMMs for pricing) to offer liquidity incentives in the form of high APRs in order to bootstrap liquidity for their liquidity pools. While effective at attracting liquidity, it also frequently results in mercenary capital that’s quick to leave as soon as the rewards drop, harming long-term sustainability. Liquidity is a project’s lifeline in DeFi and attracting it is a top priority, but attracting it requires high capital investments for initial bootstrapping and fragmentation between projects.

The XRPL’s new AMM is protocol-native, meaning that it’s built at the blockchain level itself with protocol-wide liquidity, despite varying front-facing interfaces. There may only be one pool per asset pair, and anyone may create a new XRPL liquidity pool. 

The result is that those building on the XRPL can integrate their own DEX/AMM interfaces in order to add swap functionality, without requiring liquidity to be bootstrapped nor being at risk of mercenary capital or high slippage. 

A drawback to this is that it appears AMMs may no longer be able to differentiate themselves based on factors such as having low slippage or a wide selection of assets. However, this could also be seen as an improvement as it lets developers focus on more important innovations without needing to commit resources to attracting AMM liquidity. For example, XRPL developers could now focus on vertical integration with the XRPL by adding other products such as their own stablecoin and borrowing/lending markets.

No MEV or Front-Running

Front-running is one form of miner extractable value (MEV) whereby a profitable transaction is seen in the mempool and the same trade is made, albeit with a higher gas fee so that it is executed first. Given the speed at which blocks are created, this is most commonly performed by bots. For example, if I were to discover a profitable trade for $10 and look to execute it, a bot could execute it before me by paying more in gas fees, and take off with the profit. 

Various groups such as FlashBots are actively studying MEV and it is estimated that the gross extracted value on Ethereum alone has exceeded $700M. While not all MEV is bad, it’s become clear that substantial value has been taken away from users.

The XRPL eliminates MEV and front-running through the following: 

Federated Consensus

With federated consensus, only a subset of validator nodes must come to consensus which significantly increases throughput. Stellar also uses this design with their subsets of nodes being referred to as quorum slices, whereas with the XRPL the subsets are referred to as Unique Node Lists (UNLs). 

Certain default UNLs are available for new node operators, with these default lists being formed based on successful past performance, having proven identities, and having stringent IT standards. Despite this, other UNLs may be proposed and/or chosen as desired. In general, underperforming nodes are removed as the UNLs are updated, meaning that over time the top nodes are rewarded. The result is that a group of validators come to a consensus about a given block’s transactions, so there is no single validator prioritizing transactions based on gas fees. 

Canonical Transaction Ordering

Validators in PoS blockchains are incentivized by profit and as such they prioritize transactions with the highest associated gas fees, opening up the potential for MEV. 

Instead, canonical transaction ordering means that transactions are ordered in a deterministic way that is hard to predict, while all network nodes still agree on the order of transactions. The inability to predict transaction ordering means that front-running potential is either severely mitigated or outright eliminated.

Are the above effective?

Some argue that federated consensus is not truly decentralized as validators are assigned by default. I agree as this appears to be default bias, but I’m also not a maxi that everything needs to be fully decentralized at all times. However, the number of validators managed by any single entity is limited, such as Ripple having only 2 of 35 validators. While not as decentralized as Ethereum per say, I appreciate the benefits conferred by this methodology and note the stringent UNL requirement. I’m of the opinion that the validators are worthy of their positioning despite the default bias, but also appreciate concerns over this.

Single-Sided Liquidity Provision

Liquidity pools most commonly contain a given pair of assets, such as XRP and USDC. In order to help maintain an equal composition between the two, new liquidity providers must typically provide both assets in equal proportions, such as $50 in value for each. This causes friction for liquidity providers, as they must first swap assets to have equal proportions of each, or otherwise be limited to depositing the lesser amount of either asset held.

The XRPL’s AMM enables liquidity providers to deposit only a single asset into a given pool, with half of the asset’s value being automatically converted into the paired asset. For example, if one wished to deposit $100 of XRP into a USDC/XRP pool, 50% of the XRP would be automatically converted to USD and both would then be deposited in equal amounts.

I’m very supportive of this idea and see it as the next step in the evolution of not only DEXs, but DeFi itself. I first saw this idea while working on the Venus Protocol V4 whitepaper, where it was detailed how back-end integration with Pancake Swap would enable anyone to borrow/lend the assets of their choice. If I were to only have USDC but wanted to lend another asset, Venus would automatically swap it while taking 25% of the swap fee.

This idea significantly improves user experience and I see DeFi moving heavily toward this in the future. It’s great to see the XRPL already integrating it.

One question that comes to mind, however, is in regards to new liquidity pools comprised of long-tail assets. I imagine that as liquidity providers deposit these assets which may then be swapped automatically, they could be subject to moderate slippage. That being said, this is only theoretical and likely has been thought through already. 

Central Limit Order Book (CLOB) Functionality

To date, the XRPL has solely used a CLOB design, which is common in traditional finance and has orders executed based on matching buy/sell orders. On the XRPL, the limit orders are referred to as offers and these offers may be either partially or fully filled. Additional functionalities such as auto-bridging exist, where trades automatically use XRP as an intermediary token should it be cheaper than trading directly token-to-token. 

While this is well-suited to the XRPL, most decentralized exchanges rely upon AMM pricing and each approach has its unique strengths and weaknesses. For example, order books tend to require greater liquidity (and therefore market makers with ample funds). The XRPL’s new AMM on devnet now incorporates both models and extracts liquidity from both, thus providing the best pricing with the least slippage. 

I imagine that optimal pricing would typically be via an AMM but that order book functionality would at times be beneficial (e.g. limit order trade functionality). It may be especially helpful for providing liquidity within certain trade bandwidths, in a similar fashion to Uniswap’s concentrated liquidity. Rather than relying upon AMM pricing, a heavy build-up of order book trades may help cushion any slippage impact.

Continuous Auctions

Arbitrageurs wish to profit from price discrepancies between decentralized exchanges, meaning that they’ll compete with others to execute trades where profits outweigh any potential transaction costs incurred. These transaction costs can be high on certain blockchain networks and subject to inefficiencies caused by slow block speeds.

On the XRPL, transaction costs are low and block speeds are fast, meaning that arbitrageurs can immediately bring prices back to equilibrium with external markets. This is especially relevant during highly volatile periods, as fast trade execution enables greater profitability.

However, arbitrageurs aren’t the only party to benefit from the XRPL’s architecture. One common challenge for liquidity providers is that asset price discrepancies lead to impermanent loss, a form of opportunity cost due to price divergence. For example, if XRP and USDC were to diverge in price, liquidity providers may have benefitted more by simply holding XRP instead of providing it as liquidity.

The XRPL mitigates the above through a continuous auction process where arbitrageurs bid for 24-hour windows during which they’re subject to near-zero trading fees. As XRPL transaction fees are already minimal, this is especially relevant to any arbitrageur executing a high number of trades. If another party were then to outbid them, they would be refunded pro rata. Therefore, we can expect that bids are based on historical data and any personal analysis + bias. Bid amounts that are processed are distributed amongst each AMM pool, in turn compensating liquidity providers and mitigating impermanent loss.

In summary, each liquidity pool has a 24-hour window during which arbitrageurs may bid for the right to near-zero trading fees. The bids reward liquidity providers, while arbitrageurs can efficiently capture any price discrepancies which in turn mitigates impermanent loss further.

It’s hard for me to comment on how this would work in practice as I’m missing some detailed quantitative information, and it’s such a novel idea I haven’t dug into before. For example, as more users arrive at the XRPL and arbitrage competitiveness increases substantially…will bids become very large? Will this meaningfully compensate liquidity providers? Will impermanent loss be materially mitigated? It seems like yes in theory but it’s hard to tell.

Concluding Thoughts

The XRPL has an advanced technical front but network effects are huge in DeFi. While Ethereum/BSC/Tron currently have ~80% of TVL, the XRPL is adding new capabilities that will drive further adoption and grow its developer community. For example, it recently added NFT capabilities, and additional features such as interoperable sidechains, portable digital identities, and smart contracts are expected later this year.

On the technical front, the new XRPL AMM is very low-cost, fast, and sustainable which are all great characteristics of a blockchain ecosystem. If they are able to build out a strong developer community, attract TVL, and address real-world challenges, they will be well poised. In fact, former colleagues of mine shared great things after attending the XRPL’s Apex Summit last year in Las Vegas, and an upcoming one in Amsterdam this September. Meeting the projects in-person tends to be very effective in evaluating an ecosystem.

In the meantime, I hope that the above piece was able to shed light on key architectural differences that distinguish the XRPL from others. The AMM is currently in the devnet stage but will be available in the coming months, and it should be an exciting time.

Link

community logo
Join the TheDinarian Community
To read more articles like this, sign up and join my community today
0
What else you may like…
Videos
Podcasts
Posts
Articles
🇺🇸 Jerome Powell said banks are free to provide Bitcoin and crypto services

TRILLIONS incoming 🚀

00:00:24
This Is A CONGRESSWOMAN, LISTEN..

🚨 “Something Big Is Being Hidden… 3IATLAS” – Congresswoman Luna Breaks Silence 🚨

Congresswoman Anna Paulina Luna has spoken out about the mystery of 3I/ATLAS, showing her full support for Harvard scientist Avi Loeb’s investigation. She’s now teaming up with Loeb to uncover what the government might be hiding about non-human life forms, and why access to key footage is being blocked from the public.

Luna says this fight for UFO and ET disclosure is a bipartisan battle, but warns that powerful forces inside the intelligence community and the Department of Defense are pushing back hard to keep the truth hidden.

Meanwhile, sources claim that NASA’s Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter (MRO) captured rare images of 3I/ATLAS on October 2–3, but those pictures still haven’t been released — adding even more mystery to the case.

Could this be the moment the truth finally breaks through? 👀

00:03:33
🚨BREAKING: Today, the LAST Penny will be minted!

🚨BREAKING: IT'S OFFICIAL: The US Mint will officially STOP minting pennies. Today, the LAST Penny will be minted!

One Penny Costs the U.S Taxpayer $0.37 cents to Mint.

U.S. Mint lost $85,300,000,000 BILLION minting pennies in FY2024 alone.

00:01:00
👉 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

🚨 GOOGLE TO INVEST 40B IN TEXAS DATA CENTERS 🚨

Google is set to invest 40 billion in three new data centers in Texas, expanding its presence as competitors like OpenAI and Anthropic PBC also make significant investments in the state. This investment is expected to continue through 2027.

🔑 Key Points

  • Investment Details: Google plans to build three new data centers in Texas, with locations in Armstrong County and Haskell County. One of the facilities in Haskell will be integrated with a new solar and battery energy storage plant to alleviate strain on the power grid.

  • Job Creation and Training: The investment is expected to create thousands of jobs and offer skills training for college students and electrical apprentices. Google.org’s AI Opportunity Fund will also support an electrical training program to increase the number of apprentices in Texas.

  • State Support: Texas has become a prime location for data centers due to its lower energy costs, extensive available land, and supportive ...

post photo preview

🚨 CONGRESS RELEASES NEW SENATE DRAFT TO SETTLE SEC VS CFTC TURF 🚨

The US Congress is working to clarify the regulatory framework for digital assets, with two Senate committees releasing competing drafts aimed at bringing order to the crypto market. These drafts propose significant changes that could reshape everything from Bitcoin spot markets to Ethereum disclosures and exchange rulebooks.

🔑 Key Points

  • Agriculture Committee Draft: This draft expands the Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s (CFTC) role, granting it authority over “digital commodities” and their spot markets. It sets up registration requirements for exchanges, brokers, and dealers, mirroring CFTC oversight of traditional commodities.

  • Banking Committee Draft: This draft, called the Responsible Financial Innovation Act, focuses on digital assets that straddle the line between securities and commodities. It defines an “ancillary asset” and gives the SEC explicit authority to oversee these instruments, requiring ...

🚨 RIPPLE WINS THE FIGHT BUT GHOSTS WALL STREET DESPITE 40B IPO VALUATION 🚨

Ripple has emerged victorious in its legal battle with the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) over the status of XRP, but it has chosen to remain private despite a 40 billion valuation. This decision highlights the complex relationship between crypto firms and public markets.

🔑 Key Points

  • Legal Victory: In July 2023, the court ruled that XRP was not a security when sold on public exchanges, clearing a major hurdle for Ripple. This victory was expected to pave the way for an initial public offering (IPO).

  • Staying Private: Instead of going public, Ripple has confirmed it has “no plan, no timeline” for an IPO. President Monica Long emphasized that Ripple has about 500 million in funding and a private valuation near 40 billion.

  • Avoiding Public Market Challenges: Ripple’s decision to stay private avoids the volatility and regulatory scrutiny associated with public markets. This strategy allows the ...

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 🔵:

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 🖇️:

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 📲
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 📲
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 📲
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