It is not learning to assert one’s opinion whether in question form or not.

I did not intend the dialog to end up like this, sorry. English ist not my first language and I apologize if I sound stupid. I re-read my two assumptions and I should have phrased them in a way that does not sound so inevitable. Let me try again hoping for a less heated answer.

For Bitcoin to become a kind of neo gold standard, as you propose in your opening paragraph, it has to grow considerably. This is what I meant with hyperbitcoinization. When nation states, central banks and other big entities are invested in Bitcoin as a global reserve currency I assume that its volatility will have to be a lot lower than today. If this situation became true, I think central bank monetary policy would be ineffective. If I remember correctly the IMF stated something along those lines here (“Crypto assets may one day reduce the demand for central bank money”). For example when a central bank inflates their money supply, there is no friction that could keep people, institutions, companies, etc. from selling their local currency for Bitcoin to escape the inflation. As a result the value of the local currency would fall even further, rendering the central bank policy ineffective. I am trying to see how fiat money can coexist with Bitcoin as a reserve currency. Is their advantage that they will always be more stable than Bitcoin?