So imagine if 10% stays on the old chain, it will take 10 times as long to find a block, so 2 weeks becomes 20 weeks, and then the difficulty only drops slightly so it would take like 15 weeks for the next difficulty drop.
I think the important thing to note is that the hash power is going to follow the price. If we assume that 10% of the hash power is on BTC and 90% on BTU. But if BTC price is worth 20% as much as BTU then miners will find it 2x more profitable to mine on BTC and will switch.
So if you look at it, it's actually not that relevant what miners think. It's what the economic participants that matters. If after the fork the BTC price is greater than BTU price (which I strongly suspect it will be, and plan on right away selling all my BTU) then it *guarantees* that BTC is more profitable to mine than BTU. (Because BTU can only exist while there are less miners than BTC). If enough miners switch back to BTC to mine the most economical chain, then the BTU will literally cease to exist (because BTC is valid to bitcoin unlimited, but not vice versa). In fact that existential risk is going to work against BU making people less likely to want to risk selling BTC for something that can disappear.
this is why i keep saying there won't be a fork split as people panic it would be. instead we either continue seeing the same bitcoin continue the same way or we will see a fork and 1 singular chain in the future.
miners won't risk their million dollar investment to split and mine something that may be worth less and lose a lot of revenue even if it is for a short time. and this is not to mention all the other problems and attacks and exploits that may happen because of a split.
