On 3/2/2012 2:18 AM, Krypsis wrote:
> On 1/03/2012 1:35 PM, dsi1 wrote:
>> On 2/29/2012 4:31 PM, Brooklyn1 wrote:
>>> On Wed, 29 Feb 2012 16:03:09 -1000, dsi1
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2/29/2012 2:46 PM, marco wrote:
>>>>> the directions for brown rice:
>>>>>
>>>>> Bring water to a rolling boil
>>>>> in "uncovered" container.
>>>>> I think I've seen these directions before
>>>>> for frozen vegetables.
>>>>>
>>>>> uncovered? why?
>>>>> it takes Longer to boil if uncovered
>>>>>
>>>>> marc
>>>>
>>>> My guess is that it's left uncovered so you can see when to turn the
>>>> heat down. Personally, I'd just use a glass lid.
>>>>
>>>> Boiling water without a lid is wasteful energy-wise. Putting a lid on
>>>> the pot cause the water to condense back into your food. This releases
>>>> the latent heat of evaporation. My guess is that the heat returned to
>>>> the system is significant. Why is that? Because it takes a lot of heat
>>>> to change water to steam. You can either choose to use the steam to
>>>> humidify and heat up your house or you can recycle that energy.
>>>
>>> Um, if you knew anything about cooking you'd know that often one cooks
>>> uncovered intentionally to cause a reduction. And with an
>>> uncovered/unpressurized pot you cannot produce steam, that's water
>>> vapor evaporating... you obviously failed JHS science.
>>
>> Surely, you can't be serious... oh wait... you are. One does a reduction
>> by evaporation? Amazing! This one's a keeper!
>
> I wonder what that vapourish looking stuff is that escapes from my pot
> when I'm boiling water? It can't be steam because I don't have a lid on
> the pot and I should have been told in JHS science that I cannot produce
> team in an uncovered pot. For me, JHS was a very very long time ago.
>
> Riddle me this... If I boil water on a stove in an uncovered pot, why
> will it eventually boil dry if, as we have been told by Brooklyn, no
> steam is being produced? If no steam is being produced, we cannot be
> having any loss of liquid, can we?
>
> Wait, maybe Brooklyn is wrong? Could that be possible? Did he flunk JHS
> science classes? Maybe some new discovery has been made that turns the
> old theory that I learnt on its head in more recent times?
>

It's a strange post alright. Even little kids and high school dropouts
know what happens when you heat water up. :-)