<p>Without speaking to the mining pool we are entirely in the realm of speculation so there isn't much to add on top of the linked <a href="https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/61919/why-is-this-block-empty">question</a>. If I had to guess it is just incompetence. Even if you started trying to mine an empty block there's no reason not to switch to mining a non-empty block once you've verified a set of fee paying transactions. The memoryless property of Poisson processes ensures that continuing on the empty block is no more advantageous than switching and starting from scratch on a non-empty block that offers a greater total block reward (including transaction fees).</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-05-16T13:13:26.243Z
Note that it's mined just 19 seconds after the previous block is mined. So there may be not adequate time to create a non-empty block.
Amir reza Riahi
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-05-16T13:34:22.620Z
@AmirrezaRiahi: That should be enough time to add some high fee transactions and start mining a block with those transactions in. The longest time for verifying a transaction afaik is 25 seconds though so maybe not :) https://rusty.ozlabs.org/?p=522
Michael Folkson
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-05-16T13:46:46.750Z
The longest time to verify a transaction is 25 seconds, but doesn't updating mempool and UTXO set take more time in some special cases?
Amir reza Riahi
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-05-16T13:53:33.307Z
@AmirrezaRiahi: A negligible time, yes. Not comparable to verification time though, that takes up the lion share of time. Maybe it would even make sense to include an outlier high fee transaction in a block when mining before you've fully verified it, take the punt on it being a valid transaction and remove it if it turns out not be a valid transaction. Depends on how commonly you'd encounter invalid transactions with very high fees.
Michael Folkson
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-05-16T18:18:11.540Z
From a miner's perspective, if you solve a first then secondary block solution before you have any transactions in that second one it is probably more profitable for you to submit both of the block solutions you have. If you take the chance and add more transactions after finding a solution, you would need to throw the empty block solution away there is no guarantee that you will be able to solve and propagate it in time.
Poseidon
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-05-17T06:56:37.680Z
@Amir When calculating 19 seconds since prior transactions are you assuming that block timestamps are more accurate than 1-2 hours?
RedGrittyBrick
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-05-16T09:46:49.667Z
2023-05-16T09:46:49.667Z
Michael Folkson
<p><a href="https://www.blockchain.com/explorer/blocks/btc/679115" rel="nofollow noreferrer">This block</a> is completely empty (except the coinbase transaction). Why would a miner want to discard the fees it can take from transactions? I know it's possible that a miner mine an empty block. But I can't understand the rational behind it. Like this question was asked before <a href="https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/61919/why-is-this-block-empty">here</a>. But that does not answer my question.</p>
<p>The only possible scenario that I can think of, is that miner was trying to update it's UTXO set and mempool and it can take a few seconds, and miner conservatively choose to mine an empty block (because if he choose conflicting transaction, and succeed to mine, all his efforts are wasted). Is it right? Or there's any other scenario that can cause a miner forcibly mine empty blocks?</p>

<mining-theory><mining-reward><mempool>
Why is block 679115 empty?
Amir reza Riahi
# Why is block 679115 empty?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2023-05-16)

[This block](https://www.blockchain.com/explorer/blocks/btc/679115) is completely empty (except the coinbase transaction). Why would a miner want to discard the fees it can take from transactions? I know it's possible that a miner mine an empty block. But I can't understand the rational behind it. Like this question was asked before [here](https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/61919/why-is-this-block-empty). But that does not answer my question.

The only possible scenario that I can think of, is that miner was trying to update it's UTXO set and mempool and it can take a few seconds, and miner conservatively choose to mine an empty block (because if he choose conflicting transaction, and succeed to mine, all his efforts are wasted). Is it right? Or there's any other scenario that can cause a miner forcibly mine empty blocks?

**Tags:** mining-theory, mining-reward, mempool


---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2023-05-16. Score: 2 | Accepted answer

Without speaking to the mining pool we are entirely in the realm of speculation so there isn't much to add on top of the linked [question](https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/61919/why-is-this-block-empty). If I had to guess it is just incompetence. Even if you started trying to mine an empty block there's no reason not to switch to mining a non-empty block once you've verified a set of fee paying transactions. The memoryless property of Poisson processes ensures that continuing on the empty block is no more advantageous than switching and starting from scratch on a non-empty block that offers a greater total block reward (including transaction fees).

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: Note that it's mined just 19 seconds after the previous block is mined. So there may be not adequate time to create a non-empty block.  
> **username_1**: @username_0: That should be enough time to add some high fee transactions and start mining a block with those transactions in. The longest time for verifying a transaction afaik is 25 seconds though so maybe not :) https://rusty.ozlabs.org/?p=522  
> **username_0**: The longest time to verify a transaction is 25 seconds, but doesn't updating mempool and UTXO set take more time in some special cases?  
> **username_1**: @username_0: A negligible time, yes. Not comparable to verification time though, that takes up the lion share of time. Maybe it would even make sense to include an outlier high fee transaction in a block when mining before you've fully verified it, take the punt on it being a valid transaction and remove it if it turns out not be a valid transaction. Depends on how commonly you'd encounter invalid transactions with very high fees.  
> **username_2**: From a miner's perspective, if you solve a first then secondary block solution before you have any transactions in that second one it is probably more profitable for you to submit both of the block solutions you have. If you take the chance and add more transactions after finding a solution, you would need to throw the empty block solution away there is no guarantee that you will be able to solve and propagate it in time.  
> **username_3**: @username_0 When calculating 19 seconds since prior transactions are you assuming that block timestamps are more accurate than 1-2 hours?  

---

