breaking the satoshi's

[cafter]

just assume,

if the bitcoin price rose very much that one satoshi's price became $1 and a person need to send $0.50 to another person,

how would he send half of satoshi?

is it possible to break satoshi in parts or any other solution?

it's just an assumption so don't reply me with hate and don't tell me that at that time the $1 will worth 0.01 cents. my question is that is it possible to send half satoshi?

[ABCbits]

my question is that is it possible to send half satoshi?

At current moment it's impossible. In addition, sending less than few hundred satoshi (vary by address type) is considered as dust output and other node won't broadcast your transaction. However it's possible with either soft/hard fork to add smaller unit/more precision. And as workaround, it's already possible to do so on Lightning Network. Although the amount will be rounded down when you close channel.

[cafter]

my question is that is it possible to send half satoshi?

At current moment it's impossible. In addition, sending less than few hundred satoshi (vary by address type) is considered as dust output and other node won't broadcast your transaction. However it's possible with either soft/hard fork to add smaller unit/more precision. And as workaround, it's already possible to do so on Lightning Network. Although the amount will be rounded down when you close channel.

it's possible that the protocol could be updated to allow for more decimal places, which will allow for smaller transactions?

[Knight Hider]

if the bitcoin price rose very much that one satoshi's price became $1 and a person need to send $0.50 to another person,

how would he send half of satoshi?

It won't be needed. When Bitcoin is worth $100,000,000, $0.50 is worth nothing. You don't send $0.005 now, and you won't sent half of satoshi then.

--Knight Hider

[hosseinimr93]

it's possible that the protocol could be updated to allow for more decimal places, which will allow for smaller transactions?

The 8 decimal places we have for each bitcoin now is more than enough. But if we want to have more than 8 decimal places for each bitcoin, we have to change the consensus rules through a hard fork.
According to consensus rules, the amount field in a bitcoin transaction must be an integer between 0 and 2100000000000000. (Note that in the bitcoin protocol, we deal with satoshis, not BTC. So, 1 = 1 sat)

[Zaguru12]

Just like what hosseinimr99 said it could be changed through hard fork, but let’s take a look at it on the transaction fee area. Should bitcoin actually reach the maximum supply limit (21million bitcoin=100 quadrillion satoshi) and mining stopped. Wouldn’t the transaction fee to send a bitcoin or some satoshi be increased. Moreover the transaction fee is measured in satoshi/bytes should one needs to send half of a satoshi wouldn’t the transaction fee be way less than the sending amount because having a transaction fee greater than the sending value isn’t that much logical. Should the transaction be less than a satoshi then it would take hours for it to get a confirmation and should it be abandoned it could possibly be reversed backed to the senders wallet. So logical as it is now I doubt it could be possible to send half a satoshi.

[BlackHatCoiner]

if the bitcoin price rose very much that one satoshi's price became $1 and a person need to send $0.50 to another person

They could send them milli-sats. They're not exactly like sats, they don't exist in the main chain, but it's a very real concept off-chain; in fact, micro-transactions should be done off-chain at best. It's neither possible (unless you pay a miner) to send 500 sats at the moment on-chain, because the overwhelming majority of nodes will not propagate a transaction which creates output worth less than 546 sats.

Also note that for 1 sat to reach parity with the dollar, the dollar must be very devalued as well; so devalued, that you won't be able to buy even a chewing gum with $1. So, there might not be a point at making such transaction, just as there is no point in transferring a cent.

[hosseinimr93]

It's neither possible (unless you pay a miner) to send 500 sats at the moment on-chain, because the overwhelming majority of nodes will not propagate a transaction which creates output worth less than 546 sats.

Just to be more accurate:
The 546 satoshi is the dust limit for non-segwit outputs. The dust limit for segwit outputs is only 294 satoshi.

This is the default setting and nodes are free to accept smaller outputs with changing DUST_RELAY_TX_FEE.

[BlackHatCoiner]

The dust limit for segwit outputs is only 294 satoshi.

Thanks for correcting me, I always thought it was 546, because chain spamming was happening with 546 sats worth of outputs in the not far past. Pretty strange to spam the blockchain with legacy now that I'm rethinking about it.

This is the default setting and nodes are free to accept smaller outputs with changing DUST_RELAY_TX_FEE.

Exactly. And it's more than obvious that if the value rises a lot, most will switch to something lower (or download an upgraded client which will have altered value for those who won't). It's worth to note that in 2011, that limit was 0.01 BTC, because then, that was about the same as today's ~500 sats.

[cafter]

It's worth to note that in 2011, that limit was 0.01 BTC, because then, that was about the same as today's ~500 sats.

means after some years this amount will decrease more? (i don't have knowledge that deep)

[DaveF]

It's worth to note that in 2011, that limit was 0.01 BTC, because then, that was about the same as today's ~500 sats.

means after some years this amount will decrease more? (i don't have knowledge that deep)

Not without a fork. But, as has been said the odds of needing it without a lot of things changing are fairly small.
And it's probably so far in the future none of us are going to be alive to care about it.

The other issue of needing amounts that small is still going to be altcoins.
For some reason people like using them. Not going to get into a debate about it here, but if you really need to send an amount that small the you are and the other person probably have some LTC or DOGE or whatever.

-Dave

[cafter]

Not without a fork. But, as has been said the odds of needing it without a lot of things changing are fairly small.
And it's probably so far in the future none of us are going to be alive to care about it.
-Dave

for bitcoin without a fork is not possible, but we can send value through other coins (that's nice idea to transfer value)

[sha420hashcollision]

1 sat is $0.000280 I think we will have to see a 100x on the price of BTC (2,800,000) before this becomes relevant to solve. But it is technically solved with millisatoshi and c-lightning: https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/83475/what-makes-millisatoshi-real

[hZti]

for bitcoin without a fork is not possible, but we can send value through other coins (that's nice idea to transfer value)

That might be a practical solution, but would be a disappointment for bitcoin. In my oppinion bitcoin should try to focus on practical usage. That means fast transaction times, low fees and good usability. If you need different altcoins that can be worthless any minute you will not have a good working payment system with bitcoin.

[sha420hashcollision]

The thing is you do have a working payment system in Bitcoin and every other alt-coin offers you an utterly inferior proof of finality for meaningfully sized or timed payments. Not to mention this problem is irrelevant meaning it is not a problem that real end-users have with bitcoin today and it has been solved as i mentioned in my above response which you ignored.

1 sat is $0.000280 I think we will have to see a 100x on the price of BTC (2,800,000) before this becomes relevant to solve. But it is technically solved with millisatoshi and c-lightning: https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/83475/what-makes-millisatoshi-real
- me above

[pooya87]

According to consensus rules, the amount field in a bitcoin transaction must be an integer between 0 and 2100000000000000. (Note that in the bitcoin protocol, we deal with satoshis, not BTC. So, 1 = 1 sat)

The amount field can technically be treated as an unsigned 64-bit integer which means the max value is 18,446,744,073,709,551,615 which is more than enough for a slight increase in the division, something like shifting the value left and using the extra bits as the fraction of satoshi.

for bitcoin without a fork is not possible, but we can send value through other coins (that's nice idea to transfer value)

We could come up with a complicated soft-fork that would handle such a thing too. Like adding an extra field (like how we added witness through a soft fork) to handle the extra values (ie. fraction of a satoshi) then round the values down to remain backward compatible.

[Sha256explorer]

you don't need it right now.  1 satoshi is $0.0002822 USD.  the value of bitcoin would have to increase 70/80 times to make a Satoshi equal a cent.  at that point Maybe you will need it

[sha420hashcollision]

you don't need it right now.  1 satoshi is $0.0002822 USD.  the value of bitcoin would have to increase 70/80 times to make a Satoshi equal a cent.  at that point Maybe you will need it

exactly what Im saying, not to mention millisat is a thing on lightning its not a real problem

[fillippone]

you don't need it right now.  1 satoshi is $0.0002822 USD.  the value of bitcoin would have to increase 70/80 times to make a Satoshi equal a cent.  at that point Maybe you will need it

One easy way to think about Satoshi: when Bitcoin go to 1 million dollars (Hal's terminal value would be 10 million, actually) one satoshi would be worth 1 cent. So when receiving 100 satoshi today, you are receiving one dollar when bitcoin gets to 1 million dollars (nothing is said about the real purchasing power of such a sum.

[Aikidoka]

you don't need it right now.  1 satoshi is $0.0002822 USD.  the value of bitcoin would have to increase 70/80 times to make a Satoshi equal a cent.  at that point Maybe you will need it

One easy way to think about Satoshi: when Bitcoin go to 1 million dollars (Hal's terminal value would be 10 million, actually) one satoshi would be worth 1 cent. So when receiving 100 satoshi today, you are receiving one dollar when bitcoin gets to 1 million dollars (nothing is said about the real purchasing power of such a sum.

It is probably hard to imagine 1 bitcoin being worth 1 million in the next few years. It's more likely that such a price point would be reached in the range of 10 to 20 years from now, assuming it is even possible. However, it is highly unlikely that bitcoin will ever reach a value of 100 million dollars, and the idea of 1 satoshi being worth 1 dollar is currently unrealistic.
For OP, sending half of a satoshi would be impossible because satoshi is already the smallest unit of Bitcoin. However, there are other cryptocurrencies or altcoins that use different units of measurement for that to make it happen.