Thread: Microwaves
View Single Post
  #69 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
Blinky the Shark Blinky the Shark is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,409
Default Microwaves

T wrote:

> In article .net>,
> lid says...
>> Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>>
>> > On Wed 03 Sep 2008 06:10:35p, Corey Richardson told us...
>> >
>> >> Microwave cookers are an ingenious invention, but does anyone really use
>> >> them for cooking rather than reheating?
>> >>
>> >> Sure, I use mine for softening butter or reheating tinned beans and
>> >> soups etc. but I could never see myself actually cooking a raw chicken
>> >> in one.
>> >>
>> >> What do you use your microwave oven for?
>> >
>> > I cook many things in mine with the exception of meats. I also use it for
>> > the things most people do, defrosting, melting, reheating, etc.
>> >
>> > I should say that I have a Panasonic with inverter turbo cooking
>> > technology, which is quite different than most other microwaves. When you
>> > select a power setting, you get a constant flow of power at that setting
>> > rather than the usual pulsing at full power to achieve the lower power
>> > level. This makes a big difference in cooking results.

>>
>> That's what I thought with my Panasonic inverter turbo. Then I was
>> doing something with it one day, and my TV isn't far from my microwave,
>> and I could plainly see from the interference on the television that the
>> oven was cycling power off and on to obtain that partial setting.

>
> One feature I like about my Sharp Carousel is that it has a re-heat mode
> that doesn't blast the food with microwave. It cycles the magnetron,
> about every 15 seconds it powers the magnetron down for 10 or so second.
> The food doesn't get completely dried out this way.
>
> And if you're seeing intereference on your TV that means something is
> very wrong. I'm tring to think what channels lay in the harmonics for
> 2.4GHz and the only one I can think of is a 4th order harmonic around
> 150MHz that would most likely effect channel 17 or 18.


Given that, as I said, they are almost touching (two inches apart) and
that the TV's a cheap portable from about 1996, I'm not very surprised
that I can see the interference.


--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project:
http://improve-usenet.org
Need a new news feed? http://blinkynet.net/comp/newfeed.html