This seems to happen far more frequently than one would expect from a Poisson distribution with a ~10 minute mean. Am I just bad at statistics or is something else going on?

  • 1
    Upvoted, it'd be interesting to see the probability of, for example the next block being made in under a minute. (I think that has the probability of 0.095 according to this, with the help of RC's blog though I'm not knowledgeable enough to write an answer.) – MCCCS May 12 at 7:29
  • 1
    Is your "this seems" based on calculations, or just a guess? If calculations, would you like to share them? – Nate Eldredge May 12 at 17:41
  • I haven't done any calculations, just a guess from something I noticed. Would be interesting if anyone felt inclined to put together some actual numbers – deezy May 15 at 18:28
  • I can produce some statistics based on the block timestamps if it would be of interest, but given that they do not necessarily correspond to the time at which the blocks were mined or broadcast, I don't know if that would be helpful. – Nate Eldredge May 28 at 19:20

is something else going on?


AFAIK Mining nodes don't synchronize time. Timestamps in blocks are not accurate. You cannot tell the elapsed time between two blocks by looking at timestamps in those blocks.

| improve this answer | |

this may happened when the two consecutive blocks belongs to the same miner and the second block is normally empty. 460564 AntPool 0 minutes

460533 AntPool 4 minutes

460501 BTC.TOP 6 minutes (460502 BTCC full block right after)

460445 AntPool 1 minutes

460432 F2Pool 0 minutes

460308 GoGreenLight 3 minutes

460281 AntPool 3 minutes

460238 AntPool 1 minutes

460218 1Hash 10 minutes

459932 AntPool 1 minutes


| improve this answer | |

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.