Genesis Wallet Address And Unspendable Bitcoin

[Felicity_Tide]

So recently, something led to the other which brought to my remembrance a reply I got in one of my old thread. The topic of the thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5496126.msg64063271#msg64063271 talked about dormant wallets that are no longer active but still houses some Bitcoin, and here was a reply that got my attention: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5496126.msg64063581#msg64063581

The genesis address holds 50 bitcoins less than that, because the genesis block reward is unspendable.

The reply above was based on what I said, as I specified that the "Genesis address created holds about 99.85 BTC and is currently a dormant wallet", as at the time of my posting. It is very true that a certain amount of Bitcoin can't be spent, but why is that?, And what should happen to the other amount on same address?. I think most people are still relying on old articles that says the Genesis address holds only 50btc that can't be spent. But there haven't been emphasis on if further additions could be made and what will happen to those additions.

Genesis Block and Address
Genesis block from every angle of cryptocurrency is simply the foundation of Blockchain, which happens to be the first block that needs to initiate the linking of other blocks using the cryptographic protocol inorder to store transactions in form of data. Genesis block always act as a standard to other blocks thereby showing a pattern that must be followed. This means, whatever implementation was made in the Genesis block, should be available to others that would be linked, except in other cases such as mining difficulty and others.

On january 3 2009, Satoshi Nakamoto happens to be the miner of Bitcoin Genesis block. The Genesis block received the first mining reward of 50btc, which initiated the protocol that allowed 50btc to run for approximately four years before first halving. The Genesis block is Called block 0, because there are no available blocks before it.

The reward (50btc) from the first block was transferred into the Genesis address which is owned by Satoshi Nakamoto. As at the time of my writing, this address contains about 100btc with the unspendable 50btc inclusive. The increment in the number of BTC was as a result of the amount that had been sent to same Genesis address by random people for personal reasons over the years.

My question:
1. Aside the unspendable 50btc, can the remaining btc be spent assuming Satoshi has the private key?
2. If Yes, give your reasons. If No, also share your reasons
3. Are the unspendable coins limited to only the first block (Genesis block) ?
4. If the first reward (50btc) was intensionally transformed to unspendable coins by Satoshi, does that mean that our current developers or miners can also do thesame ?.

Genesis address: https://www.blockchain.com/explorer/addresses/btc/1A1zP1eP5QGefi2DMPTfTL5SLmv7DivfNa
Genesis Block: https://www.blockchain.com/explorer/blocks/btc/000000000019d6689c085ae165831e934ff763ae46a2a6c172b3f1b60a8ce26f

I am 100% open to correction as I still see myself as a learner. Pardon any of my error and share your personal opinion.

[vjudeu]

It is very true that a certain amount of Bitcoin can't be spent, but why is that?

Because Bitcoin works on coins, not on addresses. You have the first coin, which is in this particular output: https://mempool.space/tx/4a5e1e4baab89f3a32518a88c31bc87f618f76673e2cc77ab2127b7afdeda33b#vout=0

You have transaction 4a5e1e4baab89f3a32518a88c31bc87f618f76673e2cc77ab2127b7afdeda33b and output index 0. If it would be present in the database of all coins, then it would be normally spendable, as all other coins are. However, the Bitcoin client initially started from the empty database. And initially, there was no such thing as "the Genesis Block". You started creating the whole chain from scratch, from zero "previous block hash".

And then, Satoshi created the first block, and hardcoded it in the client. He simply put a rule, that "the block 000000000019d6689c085ae165831e934ff763ae46a2a6c172b3f1b60a8ce26f has to be there as the first block". But: he didn't add the transaction 4a5e1e4baab89f3a32518a88c31bc87f618f76673e2cc77ab2127b7afdeda33b to the database! Which means, that the block is there, but the coins are not. And if you create a valid transaction, which will spend the UTXO 4a5e1e4baab89f3a32518a88c31bc87f618f76673e2cc77ab2127b7afdeda33b:0, then it will be rejected by all nodes, because this UTXO is not in the database of all spendable coins.

And what should happen to the other amount on same address?

It can be normally moved anywhere, without any restrictions, as long as you can produce a valid signature. Just because the next coins were created in the next blocks, and are just regular Scripts.

But there haven't been emphasis on if further additions could be made and what will happen to those additions.

They can be normally moved. To test that, you can create a regtest chain, where you can replace Satoshi's address with your own, and just test it. Also, many altcoins can prove you that, for example in Litecoin, you have this address: https://blockchair.com/litecoin/address/Ler4HNAEfwYhBmGXcFP2Po1NpRUEiK8km2 and as you can see, it is normally spendable in other transactions, except 97ddfbbae6be97fd6cdf3e7ca13232a3afff2353e29badfab7f73011edd4ced9.

As at the time of my writing, this address contains about 100btc with the unspendable 50btc inclusive.

No, because it is P2PK, and it contains only 50,01004040 BTC: https://mempool.space/address/04678afdb0fe5548271967f1a67130b7105cd6a828e03909a67962e0ea1f61deb649f6bc3f4cef38c4f35504e51ec112de5c384df7ba0b8d578a4c702b6bf11d5f

However, P2PKH version was always fully spendable, and contains 49,99353524 BTC: https://mempool.space/address/1A1zP1eP5QGefi2DMPTfTL5SLmv7DivfNa

can the remaining btc be spent assuming Satoshi has the private key?

Yes.

If Yes, give your reasons. If No, also share your reasons

Yes, you can test it in your own regtest, or by exploring many altcoins like Litecoin, which copy-pasted the same code, related to the Genesis Block, and used just their own public keys, instead of Satoshi's key.

Are the unspendable coins limited to only the first block (Genesis block) ?

Yes, it is only limited to the coins from the first transaction, which is https://mempool.space/tx/4a5e1e4baab89f3a32518a88c31bc87f618f76673e2cc77ab2127b7afdeda33b

If the first reward (50btc) was intensionally transformed to unspendable coins by Satoshi, does that mean that our current developers or miners can also do thesame ?.

Yes, you can burn your coins by sending them into OP_RETURN. Also, when it comes to miners, they can claim less coins than allowed, and then they are irreversibly burned. For example, this miner burned a single satoshi, and all transaction fees in block 124724 in this transaction: https://mempool.space/tx/5d80a29be1609db91658b401f85921a86ab4755969729b65257651bb9fd2c10d

[nc50lc]

My question:
1. Aside the unspendable 50btc, can the remaining btc be spent assuming Satoshi has the private key?
2. If Yes, give your reasons. If No, also share your reasons
3. Are the unspendable coins limited to only the first block (Genesis block) ?
4. If the first reward (50btc) was intensionally transformed to unspendable coins by Satoshi, does that mean that our current developers or miners can also do thesame ?.

• 1. & 3. Yes, just the genesis block's coinbase transaction output, not those other transactions.
  And it's not even related to the address in question because it's P2PK; "Pay-to-Public-Key" which basically means (in layman terms) that it's sent to a public key rather than an address.
  Most Blockexplorers just link P2PK outputs to the address derived from its public key. (your screenshot)
  So the main reason for this topic doesn't make sense in a technical perspective.
  
  
• 2. Since yes, those other UTXO are unrelated to the transaction output in the genesis block, those are basically regular outputs.
  If someone owns the private key or if someone managed to produce the same hash from a different public key that they own, they will be able to spend it.
  
  
• 4. No one asked if it's purposely made non-spendable.
  And if you mean by "do the same" to new coinbase transactions or ordinary transactions, then no.
  
  It's not transformed in some special way, the output is the same as other P2PK outputs.
  But the problem is any client that the majority of Bitcoin nodes use is designed to not include it to the UTXO set (chainstate),
  so even if you can spend it, nodes wont find that UTXO from their database.

[promise444c5]

Last week I was curious about what could be the the total transactions on the first block of the blockchain
To my surprise all i could found was 1 input, 1output

I was also going to make a similar post but I guess
This:

And then, Satoshi created the first block, and hardcoded it in the client. He simply put a rule, that "the block 000000000019d6689c085ae165831e934ff763ae46a2a6c172b3f1b60a8ce26f has to be there as the first block". But: he didn't add the transaction 4a5e1e4baab89f3a32518a88c31bc87f618f76673e2cc77ab2127b7afdeda33b to the database! Which means, that the block is there, but the coins are not. And if you create a valid transaction, which will spend the UTXO 4a5e1e4baab89f3a32518a88c31bc87f618f76673e2cc77ab2127b7afdeda33b:1, then it will be rejected by all nodes, because this UTXO is not in the database of all spendable coins.

and this:

But the problem is any client that the majority of Bitcoin nodes use is designed to not include it to the UTXO set (chainstate),
so even if you can to spend it, nodes wont find that UTXO from their database.[/li]
[/list]

did explained it all to me...

[Felicity_Tide]

As at the time of my writing, this address contains about 100btc with the unspendable 50btc inclusive.

No, because it is P2PK, and it contains only 50,01004040 BTC: https://mempool.space/address/04678afdb0fe5548271967f1a67130b7105cd6a828e03909a67962e0ea1f61deb649f6bc3f4cef38c4f35504e51ec112de5c384df7ba0b8d578a4c702b6bf11d5f

However, P2PKH version was always fully spendable, and contains 49,99353524 BTC: https://mempool.space/address/1A1zP1eP5QGefi2DMPTfTL5SLmv7DivfNa

You've just provided the necessary answers to all my questions. The examples you gave were enough to back your explanation which made the entire reply understandable. Just learnt something new, and i think anyone who comes under this thread can also learn something.
I will be locking this thread in the next two four hours as answers has already been provided by vjudeu and nc50lc. Room still available for those with contributions.

[Medusah]

No, because it is P2PK, and it contains only 50,01004040 BTC: https://mempool.space/address/04678afdb0fe5548271967f1a67130b7105cd6a828e03909a67962e0ea1f61deb649f6bc3f4cef38c4f35504e51ec112de5c384df7ba0b8d578a4c702b6bf11d5f

However, P2PKH version was always fully spendable, and contains 49,99353524 BTC: https://mempool.space/address/1A1zP1eP5QGefi2DMPTfTL5SLmv7DivfNa

Just to clarify, every UTXO in the genesis public key is spendable, except for the 50 bitcoin reward from the genesis block.  If you lock coins to satoshi's public key (P2PK), those coins can be spent normally.  It's specifically the coinbase reward from the genesis block that is unspendable.  The 0.01004040 bitcoins are spendable. 

4. If the first reward (50btc) was intensionally transformed to unspendable coins by Satoshi, does that mean that our current developers or miners can also do thesame ?.

The miner can choose to reward themselves and then burn the coins in a separate transaction, or they can simply reward themselves 0 coins.  Both options are possible and achieve essentially the same outcome.