Musk recently dropped a bombshell opinion on a podcast – he said Bitcoin is not a crypto asset at all, but rather a "real currency based on physics."

His logic is actually quite hardcore: energy is the essence of currency, and you can't print energy with a money printing machine, can you? Obviously not. Therefore, those fiat currencies printed by central banks cannot stand up to the laws of physics.

Interestingly, Musk brought up the "Kardashev Scale," a theory of civilizational evolution. According to this framework, the evolution of human civilization is essentially an improvement in the ability to control energy. Bitcoin mining is precisely the process of converting energy into scarce assets, which in some ways aligns more closely with physical laws than any currency issued by a country.

He even predicted a science fiction scenario: when AI and robots can meet all of humanity's material needs, currency may no longer be necessary—just like the post-scarcity society depicted in the "Culture" series, where people no longer struggle for survival and instead pursue artistic creation and exploration of the universe.

This perspective is indeed quite fresh. Many people are still fixated on the K-line chart looking for price fluctuations, but if we understand Bitcoin from the dimension of the evolution of energy civilization, the landscape is completely different. It is not just an investment target; it is more like a marker of the transformation of humanity's energy utilization methods.

Do you think the logic of "energy as currency" can hold up?