Bitcoin may emerge as a long-term winner if international authorities affirm the existence of non-human intelligence, even when the speedy fallout triggers a extreme monetary shock.
Over the weekend, studies emerged that Helen McCaw, a former senior analyst on the Financial institution of England, urged Governor Andrew Bailey to contemplate contingency planning for a state of affairs wherein the US authorities, or one other credible authority, releases definitive proof that humanity isn’t alone.
In her evaluation, the chance isn’t just market chaos. It’s a fast-moving confidence shock that might propagate from asset costs into the plumbing of on a regular basis life, probably inflicting financial institution runs, cost disruptions, and, within the worst case, civil dysfunction.
Ontological shock
McCaw anchors her case in “ontological shock,” a time period more and more utilized in threat circles to explain the destabilizing results of an abrupt shift in shared actuality.
On this state of affairs, collective psychological disorientation interprets straight into materials financial outcomes.
McCaw, in a Sol Basis white paper, argued that this example may result in a monetary instability channel.
She wrote that if UAP (Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena) disclosure implies a “energy and intelligence higher than any authorities,” it may undermine the legitimacy and belief that markets and banking programs depend on in silence.
In response to her:
“Affirmation, and even widespread hypothesis, that new applied sciences exist can be an exogenous shock to international monetary markets. The human response may have speedy ramifications in these markets, whether or not as a result of hypothesis or new information.”
Given these stakes, she argues the Financial institution of England should “take motion” to deal with disclosure-related monetary stability dangers.
Whereas the premise resembles science fiction, the cultural context has shifted over the previous yr.
For context, US lawmakers, together with Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, are more and more calling for presidency transparency relating to UAP.
Nevertheless, the probabilities of such a disclosure anytime quickly seem slim regardless of high-level political engagement. On Polymarket, a crypto prediction market platform, a contract titled “Will the US affirm that aliens exist earlier than 2027?” trades at roughly 13 cents, implying a 13% chance.
Nonetheless, McCaw’s pitch is basically that the rising institutional consideration and the high-impact penalties of any such affirmation justify planning forward.
Towards that backdrop, CryptoSlate has modeled how an “ontological shock” state of affairs would probably play out for Bitcoin.
Brief-term impact
If this tail occasion strikes, the speedy query for buyers is: What breaks first?
McCaw raises the likelihood that the general public may rotate towards digital currencies like Bitcoin in the event that they “query the legitimacy of presidency” and lose belief in sovereign belongings.
Nevertheless, market mechanics recommend a distinct preliminary response. Alien disclosure is basically an uncertainty shock, and uncertainty shocks commerce in two distinct phases.
In Part 1, which may final from hours to days, the market faces a “promote what you may” downside.
Within the first window after a high-credibility, reality-rewriting announcement, markets normally don’t behave like rational discounting machines. They behave like threat managers and margin clerks.
Three causes recommend Bitcoin is weak instantly, even when it later advantages from a “mistrust hedge” narrative.
First, Bitcoin is liquid 24/7, which makes it the primary stress valve. When equities are closed, and headlines hit, crypto is the place international merchants can immediately lower publicity. That makes BTC a frequent supply of “immediate liquidity,” not an automated secure haven.
Second, correlations rise when everybody de-risks collectively.
The IMF has repeatedly documented that crypto and fairness markets have turn into extra interconnected. Because of this market spillovers in returns and volatility can improve, particularly round stress episodes, undermining diversification if you want it most.
Third, volatility isn’t priced for civilization-scale surprises.
As of mid-January 2026, the VIX (one of many market’s most-watched measures of implied US fairness volatility) has been within the mid-teens. If disclosure reprices volatility upward sharply, threat limits tighten, VaR (Worth at Danger) shocks ripple, and levered positions unwind.
In these moments, “digital gold” narratives usually lose to “scale back gross publicity now.”
Put bluntly, the primary transfer is more likely to be risk-off, and Bitcoin will likely be handled as excessive beta by many macro desks.
Lengthy-term implications for gold and Bitcoin
It’s only in Part 2, lasting weeks to months, that the commerce may shift to the “belief premium” McCaw envisions.
After the primary scramble, the query modifications from “what’s liquid?” to “what’s professional?”
If affirmation of non-human intelligence is interpreted as proof that governments weren’t totally clear or not totally in management, then a piece of the general public and investor base may begin demanding belongings that really feel much less tied to state credibility.
That’s the place Bitcoin can plausibly transfer from “offered for liquidity” to “purchased for exit optionality.”
On this case, the disclosure would set off sustained mistrust in establishments, which may pressure some buyers to hunt an asset that’s borderless, self-custodiable, and never a declare on any financial institution.
If capital controls or emergency measures turn into a part of the political response, even briefly, the “censorship-resistance” narrative turns into greater than branding. It turns into a risk-management function.
Nevertheless, McCaw raises an important level relating to conventional secure havens like gold.
She means that if markets speculate that spacefaring capabilities may develop the availability of treasured metals (by way of asteroid mining or new materials sciences), gold’s shortage narrative faces a theoretical problem.
In that context, Bitcoin faces no such bodily threat as its shortage is mathematically enforced. Primarily, the highest crypto protocol’s 21 million onerous cap stays immutable.
So, in a world the place the bodily constraints of the universe are immediately up for debate, the inflexible, unyielding certainty of Bitcoin’s code may command a large premium.
