Post-Quantum State Channels on Bitcoin: POC + Architecture, looking for technical feedback

alright so first off, genuinely appreciate anyone who takes the time to read this, whether you end up caring about it or not, whether you drop a comment or just lurk. i'm not fishing for hype, i want critical feedback, hard questions, people who spot holes in the design. so here's the deal: i've been building a post-quantum payment system on top of Bitcoin. and no, this isn't just a whitepaper or a concept doc. there's an actual working proof of concept with real testnet transactions, plus a full architectural writeup. i'll be upfront that i'm holding back some details for now (sorry about that), but the core idea and the open questions are all on the table. if anyone wants to dig into the technical side, collaborate, or just argue about design choices, that's exactly what i'm here for. the project has some genuinely tricky open questions and i'd rather work through them with people who know what they're talking about than sit on it alone.

ok so the slashing mechanism is what i keep coming back to, since you flagged it as the main open question. how exactly does it connect to the unified identity commitment system at the bridge layer? because with ML-DSA-44 swapped in for an EC scheme, you lose that algebraic shortcut where you could derive a nullifier-style tag directly from the same key tree as the signing key. that shortcut basically gave you the binding between "this signature is valid" and "this exact identity commitment is what gets slashed" almost for free from the math. now that's gone and you have to wire that link up explicitly. is the plan to prove that binding inside a ZK circuit once something like LaBRADOR or Brakedown is mature enough to handle the lattice witness sizes without blowing up proof size? or is there a different approach on the table? genuinely curious how you're thinking about this because it's not a trivial problem ngl