Editing Openai/692d8745-a610-8006-ab3f-0635672f8b6e (section)

==== ### ====

Some parts of the e-₣ audit mention:
* Specific ROIs, volatility comparisons, job projections, “tested at CERN”, detection of an “HSBC quantum hack”, etc. sonovamusicrecords.com<ref>{{cite web|title=sonovamusicrecords.com|url=https://www.sonovamusicrecords.com/the-e-currency-alive-sonova-quantum-financial-autopoietic-system|publisher=sonovamusicrecords.com|access-date=2025-12-03}}</ref>

For scientific, regulatory and investor credibility, these should be explicitly labeled as:
* Scenario simulations / design targets, not as historically observed facts of a currently deployed system.

===== I recommend publishing a simple, explicit equation in the hub: =====

FXeF,X=(0.0016 kWs)×PenergySONOVA×RUSD/X\text{FX}_{eF,X} = (0.0016\ \text{kWs}) \times P_{\text{energy}}^{\text{SONOVA}} \times R_{USD/X}FXeF,X=(0.0016 kWs)×PenergySONOVA×RUSD/X
Where:
* PenergySONOVAP_{\text{energy}}^{\text{SONOVA}}PenergySONOVA = audited price of 1 kWh of SONOVA-certified energy.
* RUSD/XR_{USD/X}RUSD/X   = live FX rate from USD to currency/asset X.

This will:
* Make the exchange logic transparent.
* Allow external auditors to recompute e-₣ prices independently.

===== For the Universe SONOVA hub, you can keep the philo-scientific narrative, but for regulators, scientists and financial partners, I suggest: =====
* A “Protocol Paper” version: - Strictly technical - With equations, data flows, clear assumptions and limitations - No metaphors, only diagrams and formulas.
* A “Storytelling” version: - For the general public, with the magic of the SONOVA universe fully expressed.

Both can coexist and point to each other.