Timeline for Time vs. Temperature - What changes what?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
21 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 24, 2016 at 18:06 | history | protected | CommunityBot | ||
| May 8, 2016 at 21:41 | answer | added | Tina | timeline score: 0 | |
| Jul 6, 2015 at 9:45 | history | edited | rumtscho♦ |
edited tags
|
|
| Jan 22, 2014 at 22:26 | answer | added | rumtscho♦ | timeline score: 13 | |
| S Feb 22, 2013 at 0:50 | history | edited | Jay | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
grammer needs to be fixed
|
| S Feb 22, 2013 at 0:50 | history | suggested | CommunityBot | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
grammer needs to be fixed
|
| Feb 22, 2013 at 0:42 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| Feb 22, 2013 at 0:50 | |||||
| May 8, 2012 at 15:15 | comment | added | Chris Cudmore | If there's a mathematical link, it would be based on the difference between the desired (cooked) temperature and the applied (cooking) temperature. Then we need to take into account various chemical changes at various temperatures. I could Sous-vide a steak at 141 degrees and produce something edible, but it wouldn't have any Maillard crust. I could also pull out the ox-acetelyne torch and make a steak that is charcoal on the outside and still raw on the inside. | |
| May 6, 2012 at 15:34 | answer | added | soegaard | timeline score: 1 | |
| Feb 4, 2011 at 16:45 | comment | added | Martin Beckett | If that was the case you could make water boil by leaving it in the freezer for longer! So 3mins at 373K in a kettle should equal 5mins at 270K in a freezer | |
| Feb 3, 2011 at 11:16 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackCooking/status/33121569039458304 | ||
| Feb 2, 2011 at 15:40 | comment | added | Kara Marfia | The complexity of the 'answer' to this question is why cooking amazing food is hard (without a recipe and/or lots of experience). | |
| Feb 2, 2011 at 14:15 | comment | added | zanlok | The basic answer has to do with penetration, as represented in a couple answers below. Which is why we're all saying it's too general, because penetration of the heat depends on the composition of the food being cooked a) as related to density and specific heat and b) as related to any chemical process specific to that food (i.e., that's temperature sensitive), surface area to mass ratio, flash point, just to name some things right off, certainly other considerations exist. | |
| Feb 2, 2011 at 12:51 | answer | added | Ray | timeline score: 2 | |
| Feb 2, 2011 at 3:51 | answer | added | Michael Natkin | timeline score: 29 | |
| Feb 2, 2011 at 3:29 | answer | added | J. Win. | timeline score: 21 | |
| Feb 2, 2011 at 2:25 | answer | added | avpaderno | timeline score: 2 | |
| Feb 2, 2011 at 2:02 | comment | added | Orbling | Well, it's an interesting question, I'll give you that. Just a book or two might be needed to answer it fully. | |
| Feb 2, 2011 at 1:54 | comment | added | tonylo | "Mathematics are a bit player in this story." and physics and chemistry! It isn't a basic question, because the input sum of energy over time can't easily be translated into a cooking effect. | |
| Feb 2, 2011 at 1:51 | comment | added | Aaronut | This is an insanely general question and I don't think the simple answer you are looking for exists. It depends completely on the heating method (I'm assuming conventional oven, but you didn't specify), the size of the oven or vessel, but most importantly the type of food. How thick is it? How dense? How much surface area? Does it have a lot of water? Can steam escape? Does it have a crust? Are you using a braise, bain-marie, or anything else to control the internal temperature? Higher temperatures may activate entirely new chemical processes; Mathematics are a bit player in this story. | |
| Feb 2, 2011 at 1:26 | history | asked | Brandon | CC BY-SA 2.5 |