<p>The Lightning Network is just a collection of two-party agreements on the latest channel state, and these agreements are represented by pre-signed force-close transactions which pay each party their own respective channel balance.</p>
<p>One way of &quot;burning&quot; coins then would be to negotiate a new channel state that includes an extra OP_RETURN output with the burned amount (I'm not sure if the current LN specification allows that, but there's nothing technically preventing it). However, until a channel state with this OP_RETURN output gets settled on the blockchain when the channel is closed, the two channel parties can undo the &quot;burn&quot; if they agree on a new channel state without it (and there's probably no reason for them not to), so this proof of burn cannot be relied on by any third parties.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-11-25T11:41:18.277Z
2022-11-25T11:41:18.277Z
Vojtěch Strnad
<p>There is no way, because to provably burn coins you use scripts such as OP_RETURN, which are quite like saying &quot;I announce that these coins are unspendable&quot;.</p>
<p>You don't announce anything when making a lightning transaction, other than the new state to your fellow partner exclusively. It's the same reason why you can't have things such as NFTs off-chain.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-11-26T18:15:06.920Z
Coins can be provably burned without any `OP_RETURN` or anouncment -- just by sending them to a provably unspendable address like the [1BitcoinEaterAddressDontSendf59kuE](https://www.blockchain.com/btc/address/1BitcoinEaterAddressDontSendf59kuE).
Jonathan Cross
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-11-26T18:40:04.827Z
@JonathanCross, that isn't provably unspendable. It's part of the UTXO, and in fact, there are about 2^96 valid private keys that can unlock these outputs. But, indeed, there are ways to provably burn coins without the ``OP_RETURN`` script, just by sending coins to nowhere as it happened with transaction "5bd88ab32b50e4a691dcfd1fff9396f512e003d7275bb5c1b816ab071beca5ba".
Angelo
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-12-10T19:39:14.720Z
Thanks, you are correct, 1BitcoinEaterAddressDontSendf59kuE is "highly unlikely to be spendable".  I suppose we could do even better with a Taproot (SegWit v1) address?
Jonathan Cross
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-11-25T11:30:14.857Z
2022-11-25T11:30:14.857Z
Angelo
<p>Is there a provable way to &quot;burn&quot; a single satoshi for example?</p>

<lightning-network><proof-of-destruction>
Does the Lightning Network have an equivalent to "Proof of burn"?
Jonathan Cross
# Does the Lightning Network have an equivalent to "Proof of burn"?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2022-11-25)

Is there a provable way to "burn" a single satoshi for example?

**Tags:** lightning-network, proof-of-destruction


---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2022-11-25. Score: 1 | Accepted answer

The Lightning Network is just a collection of two-party agreements on the latest channel state, and these agreements are represented by pre-signed force-close transactions which pay each party their own respective channel balance.

One way of "burning" coins then would be to negotiate a new channel state that includes an extra OP\_RETURN output with the burned amount (I'm not sure if the current LN specification allows that, but there's nothing technically preventing it). However, until a channel state with this OP\_RETURN output gets settled on the blockchain when the channel is closed, the two channel parties can undo the "burn" if they agree on a new channel state without it (and there's probably no reason for them not to), so this proof of burn cannot be relied on by any third parties.


---

### Answer by username_2 on 2022-11-25. Score: 0

There is no way, because to provably burn coins you use scripts such as OP\_RETURN, which are quite like saying "I announce that these coins are unspendable".

You don't announce anything when making a lightning transaction, other than the new state to your fellow partner exclusively. It's the same reason why you can't have things such as NFTs off-chain.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: Coins can be provably burned without any `OP_RETURN` or anouncment -- just by sending them to a provably unspendable address like the [1BitcoinEaterAddressDontSendf59kuE](https://www.blockchain.com/btc/address/1BitcoinEaterAddressDontSendf59kuE).  
> **username_2**: @username_0, that isn't provably unspendable. It's part of the UTXO, and in fact, there are about 2^96 valid private keys that can unlock these outputs. But, indeed, there are ways to provably burn coins without the ``OP_RETURN`` script, just by sending coins to nowhere as it happened with transaction "5bd88ab32b50e4a691dcfd1fff9396f512e003d7275bb5c1b816ab071beca5ba".  
> **username_0**: Thanks, you are correct, 1BitcoinEaterAddressDontSendf59kuE is "highly unlikely to be spendable".  I suppose we could do even better with a Taproot (SegWit v1) address?  

---

