On Thu 27 Dec 2007 03:56:14p, Miche told us...

> In article >,
> Wayne Boatwright > wrote:
>
>> On Thu 27 Dec 2007 11:50:40a, Janet Baraclough told us...
>>
>> > The message 4>
>> > from Wayne Boatwright > contains these words:
>> >
>> >
>> >> If a recipe specifies ounces for a non-liquid ingredient, it should
>> >> be weighed. Often you can go by the packaging of the ingredient;
>> >> e.g., a "stick" of butter is usually 4 ozs. and will be marked as
>> >> such. Cheese, chocolate, pre-packaged nuts, and many other
>> >> ingredients are marked by weight. having a kitchen scale makes
>> >> weighing non-liquid ingredients extremely easy and accurate. Liquid
>> >> ingredients should be measured in a cup.
>> >
>> > No need for a jug, Wayne. Modern electronic scales have a si,mple
>> > button to convert to weighing liquid measures (either imperial or
>> > metric).
>> >
>> > http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/...ealticouk-home
>> > imp -21/ref=nosim
>> >
>> > Janet.
>> >
>>
>> I didn't know that. Does it account for the difference in density for
>> different liquids?
>
> I thought a fluid ounce was a measure of volume, not density.
>
> Miche
>

You're quite right, Miche, and that was my point. I can measure any liquid
by volume. However, if you're attempting to use a scale to measure a
liquid, there needs to be some compensation for density of various liquids
one might weigh. For example, an ounce of water is lighter than an ounce
of thick molasses. If there is a scale capable of measuring liquids, it
would have to know the difference, wouldn't you think? I don't know how
these "new fangled" scales work. Color me stupid. :-)

--
Wayne Boatwright

*******************************************
Date: Thursday, 12(XII)/27(XXVII)/07(MMVII)
Countdown till New Years
4dys 6hrs 30mins
*******************************************
Do what you will with this tagline,
just don't bother me about it!
*******************************************