A viral YouTube video purports to demonstrate that ice does not melt in the microwave. According to the video, the ice “refuses” to do so. Even Google “believes” this video and will explain to you scientific reasons why ice does not melt in the microwave. Is it true? Does ice not melt in the microwave? To satisfy my own curiosity, before I began writing this article, I quickly melted some ice in a microwave. To my immense surprise, I found that, yes, of course, ice melted! Perhaps there is a kernel of truth to these claims, though.
The Bottom Line: Can Microwaves Melt Ice?
A viral video from the channel Impossible Science claims that microwaves cannot melt ice due to “locked” hydrogen bonds. While there is a sliver of physics behind why ice melts slowly, the idea that it “refuses” to melt is false.
In reality, the video relies on a “Substitution Coup”—a classic camera trick—to hide the melting. As long as there is a microscopic film of liquid water on the surface (which happens the moment ice leaves the freezer), a microwave will heat that liquied water, which then melts the ice through conduction. Ice melts in the microwave; don’t let a jump-cut convince you otherwise.
Fake Videos Showing Ice Not Melting in a Microwave
The efficiency of a microwave oven tends to make people think that putting something in a microwave is akin to placing it on the surface of the sun. They expect ice to not only melt, but to melt in a matter of nanoseconds, virtually in no time at all. It doesn’t.
The ImpossibleScience presenter starts the video with a long and elaborate ‘scientific’ explanation about why a microwave cannot melt ice. He explains how microwaves heat food, and then he explains that when water freezes, the water molecules stop moving around and cluster close together, where their attraction creates very strong hydrogen bonds.
If you’ve read the article I linked above, you know that microwaves work by exciting the water molecules, imparting energy to them, and increasing their rotation, which creates heat. This heat then cooks the food through conventional conduction.
💡 Did You Know?
The microwave wasn’t even meant to be an oven. It was discovered by accident when a radar engineer noticed a chocolate bar melting in his pocket. Interestingly, thefirst microwave ovensdidn’t have turntables at all—they relied on different methods to distribute energy.
Pseudo-Scientific Explanations About Ice
So, according to the video, since the molecules are all jumbled together in a crystalline arrangement with tight hydrogen bonds, the microwaves can’t excite them and make them rotate like little Tasmanian devils, so therefore, the microwave can’t melt the ice.
He also says something during the video about there being a (mysterious) reason for the defrost settings (there isn’t, they are just lower power), but doesn’t seem to mention this again. This kind of reticence, where a person provides a lot of detail, suddenly becomes vague, and then becomes detailed again, is a quite reliable sign of deception.
Also, before beginning his experiment, he explains that you must remove the rotating glass plate because (insert some needless explanation here, there’s a reason for this continued elaboration) glass will indeed heat up in the microwave, and this heat will then melt the ice. Read on to find out exactly why he does all of this.
💧 Pure Water, Real Science
While the experimenter uses distilled water as a simple prop, the “purity” of water is often misunderstood. Many people worry that drinking distilled water is dangerous because it lacks minerals, while others think it’s a health miracle. In reality, grocery store distilled water is perfectly safe for most people, but will truly 99% pure water kill you? Is distilled water actually safe to drink? Find out the truth about minerals, purity, and the myths surrounding distilled water.
The Anatomy of a Scientific “Con”
In the video, the presenter uses a common deceptive tactic: he is incredibly specific about hydrogen bonds but suddenly “vague” about how a defrost setting works. This is a red flag in Statement Analysis. Here are three common linguistic tricks used to sell pseudo-science:
1. The “Specificity Shift”
Deceivers often provide a mountain of “boring” technical truths to establish authority (the Hydrogen Bond explanation). However, when they reach the part of the story where the “magic” or the lie happens (the Defrost or the Experiment), they suddenly become brief and vague.
- The Tell: If someone can explain a molecule but “can’t quite remember” why they turned off the rotating plate, they are likely hiding a manual manipulation.
2. “Text-Bridging”
Notice how the video uses jump cuts or “later on…” transitions? In linguistics, these are called re-indexing expressions. They allow a liar to skip over the “work” of the experiment where the deception actually occurs.
- The Tell: A legitimate scientific demonstration values the process as much as the result. If the “boring” middle part is missing, the result is likely manufactured.
3. The “Authority Anchor”
This is the practice of “anchoring” a lie to a well-known scientific fact. By explaining how microwaves heat water correctly at the start, the presenter builds a “truth-bias” in your brain.
- The Tell: You are more likely to believe a lie if it is sandwiched between two undeniable truths.
Pro Tip: If a “scientist” tells you that a basic household appliance works through a “mysterious” or “complex” process they don’t have time to explain, they aren’t teaching—they’re selling.
The “Experiment” Play-by-Play
To set the stage for his “proof,” the presenter performs a series of specific actions designed to look like a controlled test:
- The Setup: Both containers—one filled with ice cubes and one with liquid water—are placed in the microwave simultaneously.
- The Modification: He pointedly removes the glass rotating plate, claiming it would interfere with the results by transferring heat.
- The Run: The microwave is set for two full minutes. Notably, despite his earlier mention of “defrost” settings, he appears to run the machine on full power.
- The “Result”: After the timer dings, he removes both containers. The water is steaming and hot, but the ice remains remarkably solid.
- The Verification: He uses an infrared thermometer to show the ice is “warmer” than before but still frozen, presenting this as definitive proof that microwaves cannot melt ice.
The Reality Check: This experiment is not shown in one continuous camera shot. In the world of video deception, this “missing time” is where the actual work happens.
Anatomy of a “Substitution Coup”
When the detailed lecturing stops and the jump-cuts begin, we move from science into the realm of stage magic. A Substitution Coup is the secret switching of one object for another under the cover of a distraction.
1. The Real Reason the Turntable is Gone
The presenter insists on removing the rotating glass plate for “scientific” reasons, but the practical reason is Alignment. Without a rotating plate, it is easy to place a fresh, unmelted bowl of ice in the exact same spot as the original. This ensures the “after” shot looks identical to the “before” shot, hiding the edit.
2. The Linguistic “Defrost” Pivot
Notice the sudden Specificity Shift. He is a “detail expert” when discussing microscopic hydrogen bonds, but becomes a “clueless observer” regarding the literal buttons on the microwave. This reticence—being detailed, then vague, then detailed again—is a primary red flag for verbal deception.
3. The Forensic Evidence
If you actually nuke water next to ice for two minutes, the environment changes. A legitimate shot would show:
- Condensation: Steam from the boiling water should fog the microwave walls.
- Surface Slump: Ambient heat would cause the ice cubes to “round” at the edges.
If the ice looks sharper and “drier” after two minutes of radiation than it did at the start, you aren’t looking at a miracle of physics—you’re looking at a bowl of ice that was sitting in a freezer ten seconds ago.
The Water Bowl: A Prop, Not a Control
The “experimenter” puts two plastic containers in the microwave, one with water and the other with ice cubes. You will notice that in all such videos, there is a container of water. The container of water seems to be some type of ‘control.’ The implication is that if the water boils but the ice stays frozen, the microwave must be working, and therefore his theory about hydrogen bonds is correct.
Here is why this is a deceptive tactic:
- It Solves a Problem That Doesn’t Exist: You don’t need a control to prove a microwave is on. You can hear the hum, see the lights, and—most importantly—see the water boiling. The water isn’t there to “test” the microwave; it’s there to provide a visual contrast that makes the (fake) lack of melting look more dramatic.
- The “Boiling Water” Distraction: By including a bowl of boiling water, the presenter creates a massive amount of visual “noise.” Your eyes are drawn to the steam and the bubbling, which distracts you from looking too closely at the ice.
- The Hidden Benefit (for the Liar): Steam from the “control” water provides a perfect excuse for any moisture seen in the microwave. If a viewer spots a drop of water on the floor of the microwave, the presenter can point to the boiling bowl rather than admitting the ice was actually melting before the Substitution Coup occurred.
The Forensic Takeaway: In a real scientific test of “Can microwaves melt ice?”, you would only use ice. Adding a second, different substance just introduces more variables. In this video, the water isn’t a “control”—it’s a prop used to build authority and distract the eye.
Why It’s Not True That Ice Refuses to Melt in the Microwave
As I said at the beginning, ice will melt pretty quickly in a microwave, especially on the regular high setting. This will happen no matter what type of container you put it in, and whether you remove the glass plate (we’ve seen the real reason for removing the rotating glass plate. All the other scientific blah-blah just doesn’t matter here, as the evidence speaks for itself (just try it). But I’ll offer a bit of explanation, anyway. Here is a simpler lay explanation as to why the scientific explanation given in the video and on various websites is untrue.
As soon as you remove ice from the freezer, the surface starts to melt, just a little. And when you put it into a container, even a plastic one, well, that’s gonna melt the ice contacting the surface just a little bit. Even the tiniest bit of free water will be quickly ‘excited’ by the microwaves and they will then quickly impart heat to the ice next to them, which will quickly start melting, and getting excited, and melting some more ice…it’s a chain reaction.
There are a number of fanciful science articles that explain why it’s ‘so difficult’ to melt ice in a microwave. These articles often get distracted by ‘dipole rotation’ and ‘crystalline lattices’ while ignoring the simple reality of conduction. In reality:
- Dipole rotation is just the fancy way of saying microwaves “jostle” water.
- Crystalline lattice is just a fancy way of saying ice is a solid.
One such article even claims that the water will tend to boil first:
Although it only takes an increase of a few °C to melt the ice, and the water has to heat up by about 80°C to boil, the water will normally boil before the ice melts!
It’s as if they didn’t even try this. I’m not sure how they define ice melting. Depending on the amount of water, it may boil before all the ice melts, but the ice will certainly be well on its way to melting completely. And you must use the same amount of water to ice by weight for this to even work at all.
Alas, these types of explanations are about subverting our expectations and making us think the world is so much more interesting than it sometimes is, but there is not much to be excited about here. There are many people who want to believe this so badly that they will ‘confirm’ ridiculous claims with their own experiment. For example, there is one lady who usually makes ASMR videos, who placed an ice cube on a piece of salmon and covered it with parchment paper before heating it in the microwave.
When done, the ice cube was completely intact so she tossed it aside. This is balderdash, but it didn’t stop folks from claiming to have duplicated it.
Most people will easily confirm that ice melts in a microwave, but some are surprised that it melts so slowly. The fascination here is that the ice doesn’t melt at once, immediately. That’s true, but it melts pretty quickly. It takes a lot of energy to melt the ice and if you’ve ever heated something frozen, I don’t really know why you’d be surprised that ice doesn’t turn into a puddle in a nanosecond.
Regardless, the point is that you cannot avoid melting ice in a microwave. But, why make a YouTube video proving that ice melts in a microwave?
Lying sells! And, why write an article debunking it? Well, it makes me feel better. And now you will not likely be pre-influenced by such scientific flourishes in the future.
🛠️ DIY Debunk: The “Ice vs. Microwave” Challenge
If you want to prove to yourself that physics hasn’t been broken, you can run this experiment in your own kitchen in under three minutes. Unlike the “Impossible Science” version, we won’t use any jump cuts.
What You’ll Need:
- A microwave-safe bowl.
- A handful of ice cubes (fresh from the freezer).
- A microwave (turntable on).
The Steps:
- Check the Surface: Take the ice out and let it sit for just 30 seconds. You’ll notice the cubes start to look “glossy.” That is liquid water, and it is the microwave’s “way in.”
- The 60-Second Blast: Place the bowl of ice in the microwave and run it on High for 60 seconds. Do not use the defrost setting.
- Observe the “Slump”: When the timer dings, you won’t see a puddle of water (yet), but you will see the cubes have rounded off and shrunk. The ice is melting.
- The “Chain Reaction”: Stir the cubes so the cold meltwater coats the rest of the ice. Put it back in for another 60 seconds.
Why Yours Melts and Theirs “Didn’t”:
By the end of the second minute, you will have a bowl of ice-cold water with small, floating remnants of cubes. The reason is simple: conduction.
In the fake video, they likely swapped the “post-microwaved” ice for a bowl of deep-frozen, bone-dry ice cubes. In your kitchen, the tiny bit of liquid water on the surface of your ice absorbs the microwave energy, heats up, and melts the ice touching it. This creates more water, which absorbs more energy—a “runaway” melting effect that no amount of “hydrogen bond” lecturing can stop.
The Golden Rule of Science Videos: If they tell you to disable a safety or functional feature (like a turntable) for a “scientific reason,” they aren’t trying to show you the truth—they’re trying to control the frame.
🔍 Sidebar: Why is Google Spreading This Myth?
If you search “Does ice melt in the microwave?”, you might see a Google snippet or an AI summary claiming ice doesn’t melt in the microwave. Here is why the search engine is getting it wrong:
- The Consensus Trap: Google’s AI looks for the most common answer across the web. Because dozens of low-quality “fun fact” sites have scraped and repeated the Impossible Science video’s claims without testing them, the algorithm sees a “consensus” of misinformation.
- AI-Generated Echo Chambers: Many of the articles you see are simply AI-scraped summaries of the original viral video. Because AI models prioritize “plausible-sounding” text over physical verification, they repeat the jargon (like “crystalline lattice”) as fact, creating a feedback loop of pseudoscience.
- The Authority Bias: The original video uses high-level physics terms (like “crystalline lattice” and “dipole rotation”). Search engines mistake this technical vocabulary for high authority, even when the accompanying video footage is manipulated.
- Circular Reporting: Many sites now cite the Google snippet as proof, and Google cites those sites back. This creates an “echo chamber” where the physical reality of your kitchen is ignored in favor of viral SEO.
- The Fact: Physics doesn’t change just because a video goes viral. If you put ice in your microwave, it will melt.