Let's assign prime numbers to transactions instead of coins

[denett]

@keyvank

E.g. if I assign prime 7 to my transaction (which is submitted in block 18) and I get a batched exclusion proof of prime 7 in blocks (19,100), I can be completely sure that there isn’t any valid transaction in blocks (19,100) that could spend part/all of my coins.

For this to be the case I think the clients also need to check whether the operator is only doing additions to the accumulator. The operator could add prime 7 in block 20 and remove it again in block 21. In this case there could be a transaction in block 20 that will go unnoticed.
A fix for this could be that the operator provides a Wesolowski proof for every accumulator transition. This proof could be checked on chain, or should be send to every client off chain.