Timeline for What direction must one stir molten chocolate?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
14 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 8, 2014 at 22:34 | vote | accept | stir_choc | ||
| Dec 8, 2014 at 22:40 | |||||
| Dec 7, 2014 at 20:55 | comment | added | stir_choc | Just to be sure: I mean: I acknowledge that using highly sensitive measurement instruments one could argue that the Coriolis effect is measurable even when stirring. I recognize this is negligible (even if a factory uses containers the size of a bathtub or bigger) and thus probably not the real reason or origin of the myth. However, getting stronger/longer/differently aligned 'structures' depending on stir-direction OR 'breaking' 'structures' when changing stir-direction (even after an X amount of (transport-)time) could hold chocolate uhh.. water. It might even be noticed by craftsmen. | |
| Dec 7, 2014 at 20:44 | comment | added | Cascabel♦ | @stir_choc Ah, okay, never mind then. Yeah, I think it got a bit lost in translation, sorry. It really sounded like you meant it could be a tiny but real effect, enough to justify the original story. | |
| Dec 7, 2014 at 20:38 | comment | added | stir_choc | @Jefromi, that is what I meant, did that somehow got lost in translation (on my non-native speaker part)? | |
| Dec 7, 2014 at 20:32 | comment | added | Cascabel♦ | @stir_choc There's a difference between "nitpicky" and "has no measurable effect"; the former sounds like you mean "this tiny tiny effect is what makes the difference" and the latter says "this falsehood is why people think this matters but it really doesn't". | |
| Dec 7, 2014 at 20:30 | comment | added | stir_choc | @Jefromi: I already noted in my first comment that I found the Corliolis effect nitpicky (but in an attempt to figure out where the myth comes from, it is a valid answer, as pointed out in that link from "The New Kitchen Science"). However, some protein/polymer/gluten string thingy/composition (temporarily) breaking down/loosing strength/changing orientation might be less nitpicky reason. If there is such a reason.. | |
| Dec 7, 2014 at 20:23 | comment | added | Cascabel♦ | For the answer: We've seen from the comments here (posting links to other places) that people are really eager to buy into "it's the coriolis effect" explanations. I honestly think the way you've addressed that idea gives it too much credit. | |
| Dec 7, 2014 at 20:19 | comment | added | Cascabel♦ | @stir_choc That's just yet another person propagating the same bad information. (They do say it's tiny, "a calorie per century", but they say it affects kitchen sink whirlpools, which is false.) See this, for example: physics.stackexchange.com/questions/7738/…. The coriolis effect is detectable on the scale of a bathtub... as long as you let the water settle for a day first so that it becomes the dominant effect. As soon as you're stirring (or even just... pouring liquid in asymmetrically), the coriolis force is so tiny you'll never notice it. | |
| Dec 7, 2014 at 20:17 | comment | added | stir_choc | @Jefromi: I also found this (which is an un-attributed copy of a piece of text from Howard Hillman's "The New Kitchen Science: A Guide to Knowing the Hows and Whys for Fun and Success in the Kitchen" (don't know how to do a google-books preview link) which also puts things in perspective. Actually, I'm contemplating to add (not accept) the text from that link as an answer. | |
| Dec 7, 2014 at 20:13 | comment | added | Cascabel♦ | @stir_choc Pretty sure that's a joke. | |
| Dec 7, 2014 at 20:12 | comment | added | stir_choc |
Apparently.. from this source (I couldn't find the recipe however): "Also: there is no possible mechanism by which stirring counterclockwise could give different results than stirring clockwise, unless Cook's Illustrated recipes depend on the weak nuclear force." "The recipe was optimized for the northern hemisphere, and the accompanying article says as much. You should stir clockwise in the southern hemisphere. You want the Coriolis effect to augment your stirring, not counteract it."
|
|
| Dec 7, 2014 at 20:00 | comment | added | ElendilTheTall | Cooks illustrated has recipes that make use of the Coriolis Effect? Good grief. It doesn't affect anything smaller than weather systems! | |
| Dec 7, 2014 at 19:20 | comment | added | stir_choc | I was just about to discard it as a 'myth' other than the scientifically (but nitpicky) Coriolis effect (that apparently Cook's Illustrated has some recipes that (ab)use this effect). But then I found some papers (and references to them) about stirring-direction having a measurable effect on gluten(length), polymer(strength) and chiral pairs (orientation ?). While the origin might be a myth (altough craftsmen often noted things before they were scientifically proven), I (currently) still can not discard it as a complete myth. | |
| Dec 7, 2014 at 19:10 | history | answered | Wayfaring Stranger | CC BY-SA 3.0 |