The Breville Control Freak is close to what you want in a burner. My son in law has it and loves it - and it is very impressive, and very pricey. But he makes some amazing dishes with it, so I think - if you care a lot about precise temperature control - it is worth it.
> most obviously the number of people who to socialize in rooms with loud music and poor acoustics, suggesting that many do not.
I think people go to restaurants for the food and bars for the atmosphere and crowds (and drink of course). . If they are noisy then that’s a consequence of success, not enough to stop most people from going, even if they hate shouting.
If noise in a bar is a negative, as it is for me, one would expect bars to be designed to minimize it, which I don't think they are. Also, some social spaces have loud music.
One theory I have seen is that people like loud environments because they can talk to someone next to them without being overheard by those farther away, but that doesn't strike me as very plausible. Other explanations are welcome.
Noise in a bar is a negative for me outside live performances. I expect it’s a negative for a lot of people. I never check for that when going out though, I’m either following a crowd or if I pick a venue there’s no obvious way to tell.
Boiling water is always the same temperature, and the only parameter is how fast you're boiling it. Since almost everything that's cooked contains water, measuring the temperature of the pot would not be useful for most recipes, except for a handful that require keeping the food at sub-boiling temperatures for periods of time.
As I tried to suggest, I suspect that the surface temperature of the bottom of a bot of strongly boiling water is above 212°, with heat being conducted from there to the water to turn it to steam. The higher the temperature the greater the heat transmission. For a simmer you probably want the bottom of the pot close to 212°.
I am planning to check the temperature of boiling water at various levels in the pot — I don't think it is uniform. But I'm currently traveling and that will have to wait until I get home.
If you are cooking food in oil, deep frying or sauteing, there is nothing holding the temperature at the boiling point of water.
I agree with you about sauteing but the bulk (literally) of cooking happens at the boiling point of water, inside the meat or vegetable; where there is water. Deep fryers have thermostats, so I suppose a stovetop with a thermostat would function well as the heating element of a deep fryer give or take temperature differences due to thermal conduction unless the probe plugged into the control board and could be dropped into the pot.
> I am planning to check the temperature of boiling water at various levels in the pot — I don't think it is uniform. But I'm currently traveling and that will have to wait until I get home.
If it was perfectly uniform there would be no convection, and the bubbles would not all start on the bottom. That said, the only people I can think of who care about the different locations within a pot of water are Japanese tea aficionados, so the temperature can't be very much different. Let me know about your results!
My S.O. pointed out many years ago that electric blankets don't have thermostats. The settings control the duty cycle, not the temperature. If you forget to turn on the blanket before you want to go to bed, you just turn it to 10, and it'll heat up faster than if you set it to 6. I suspect a similar tradeoff in the kitchen.
The conventional knobs on the stove top control how much gas or electricity is going to the burners. Sensors that could manage feedback would probably be cheaper now than ever before, but are a distinct add-on cost. An optical sensor wouldn't be as reliable with every different pot you own as your well-honed instincts. It's relatively easier to instrument the electric skillet.
Electric range burners also control power by duty cycle, the electric current to the burner element is continuously alternating between on and off, being on full time at the highest setting and off for more of the time as the dial is turned lower. This means there is no measurement of the actual temperature. It would be fairly easy to instead add a temperature sensor at the burner and then a simple control system to switch the power to the element to keep a set temperature, but aside from the Breville unit Andy in TX mentioned I don’t know of any ranges that incorporate this.
For what it's worth, I mostly cook on induction burners. What you probably want is a sensor observing the bottom of the pot, not the top of the burner.
A few thoughts. Japanese rice cookers keep rice warm for hours after it is ready so presumably some kind of feedback loop? And on the subject of Japan, easily the best toilets in the world. Perhaps their being a rainy country explains why they don’t have variable flush beyond big flush/small flush.
I too was a huge Psion fan! And on that subject (sort of) I strongly recommend the movie BlackBerry. I’m not sure how much is accurate and clearly lots is left out but it’s a terrific film.
And as I get older noisy restaurants bother me more and more. Not sure I want silent ones though! Deep carpets etc do the trick well enough at least so far.
Of noisy restaurants and similar locales -- I'd like a jukebox selection where, if the user pays the coin and makes the correct selection, the result is about four minutes of silence. (the "b-side" of such a selection might be "white-noise" a.k.a. mild static) At present the best, often unsatisfactory option is to buy a choice of music.
I mentioned your stove idea in my latest newspaper column, which appears in the Democrat Gazette (Little Rock) and the Telegram (Worcester, MA). I mentioned you plus a solution I found. It's the second item in a multi-item column: https://nwa.pressreader.com/article/282415584134306
All these ideas are dependent on a lot of other things working perfectly. Particularly electricity. I cook a lot, and regularly use all four burners at different intensities. There is just no substitute for attention, except maybe a factory system.
The two flush buttons David is referencing on existing toilets is actually to get around this. The law simply requires one button meet the flush regulation so what really happens is everyone just hits both buttons together because we all like our toilets to actually work. The designers even set up the UI to support depressing both together with one hand easily. Best thing you can do, sans getting a commercial pressure toilet, is replace your single button with a double button and you can relive the glories of your youth not having to toilet plunge or snake every other flush.
The Breville Control Freak is close to what you want in a burner. My son in law has it and loves it - and it is very impressive, and very pricey. But he makes some amazing dishes with it, so I think - if you care a lot about precise temperature control - it is worth it.
https://www.breville.com/us/en/products/commercial/cmc850.html
> most obviously the number of people who to socialize in rooms with loud music and poor acoustics, suggesting that many do not.
I think people go to restaurants for the food and bars for the atmosphere and crowds (and drink of course). . If they are noisy then that’s a consequence of success, not enough to stop most people from going, even if they hate shouting.
If noise in a bar is a negative, as it is for me, one would expect bars to be designed to minimize it, which I don't think they are. Also, some social spaces have loud music.
One theory I have seen is that people like loud environments because they can talk to someone next to them without being overheard by those farther away, but that doesn't strike me as very plausible. Other explanations are welcome.
Noise in a bar is a negative for me outside live performances. I expect it’s a negative for a lot of people. I never check for that when going out though, I’m either following a crowd or if I pick a venue there’s no obvious way to tell.
The alternative to shouting in a noisy place is to get closer. This works best for couples.
There are apps for larger groups. You can try a group FaceTime call. Perhaps Android phones have something similar.
Boiling water is always the same temperature, and the only parameter is how fast you're boiling it. Since almost everything that's cooked contains water, measuring the temperature of the pot would not be useful for most recipes, except for a handful that require keeping the food at sub-boiling temperatures for periods of time.
As I tried to suggest, I suspect that the surface temperature of the bottom of a bot of strongly boiling water is above 212°, with heat being conducted from there to the water to turn it to steam. The higher the temperature the greater the heat transmission. For a simmer you probably want the bottom of the pot close to 212°.
I am planning to check the temperature of boiling water at various levels in the pot — I don't think it is uniform. But I'm currently traveling and that will have to wait until I get home.
If you are cooking food in oil, deep frying or sauteing, there is nothing holding the temperature at the boiling point of water.
I agree with you about sauteing but the bulk (literally) of cooking happens at the boiling point of water, inside the meat or vegetable; where there is water. Deep fryers have thermostats, so I suppose a stovetop with a thermostat would function well as the heating element of a deep fryer give or take temperature differences due to thermal conduction unless the probe plugged into the control board and could be dropped into the pot.
> I am planning to check the temperature of boiling water at various levels in the pot — I don't think it is uniform. But I'm currently traveling and that will have to wait until I get home.
If it was perfectly uniform there would be no convection, and the bubbles would not all start on the bottom. That said, the only people I can think of who care about the different locations within a pot of water are Japanese tea aficionados, so the temperature can't be very much different. Let me know about your results!
Re Thermostatic Bathtub: I think something like a japanese bathtub (keyword ofuro) would have that feature. Here's one: https://www.aquaticausa.com/products/627722004484-aquatica-true-ofuro-tranquility-heating-freestanding-stone-japanese-bathtub-usa
My S.O. pointed out many years ago that electric blankets don't have thermostats. The settings control the duty cycle, not the temperature. If you forget to turn on the blanket before you want to go to bed, you just turn it to 10, and it'll heat up faster than if you set it to 6. I suspect a similar tradeoff in the kitchen.
The conventional knobs on the stove top control how much gas or electricity is going to the burners. Sensors that could manage feedback would probably be cheaper now than ever before, but are a distinct add-on cost. An optical sensor wouldn't be as reliable with every different pot you own as your well-honed instincts. It's relatively easier to instrument the electric skillet.
I hadn't thought about electric blankets, but perhaps they should also have the option of setting temperature instead of power.
Electric range burners also control power by duty cycle, the electric current to the burner element is continuously alternating between on and off, being on full time at the highest setting and off for more of the time as the dial is turned lower. This means there is no measurement of the actual temperature. It would be fairly easy to instead add a temperature sensor at the burner and then a simple control system to switch the power to the element to keep a set temperature, but aside from the Breville unit Andy in TX mentioned I don’t know of any ranges that incorporate this.
For what it's worth, I mostly cook on induction burners. What you probably want is a sensor observing the bottom of the pot, not the top of the burner.
A few thoughts. Japanese rice cookers keep rice warm for hours after it is ready so presumably some kind of feedback loop? And on the subject of Japan, easily the best toilets in the world. Perhaps their being a rainy country explains why they don’t have variable flush beyond big flush/small flush.
I too was a huge Psion fan! And on that subject (sort of) I strongly recommend the movie BlackBerry. I’m not sure how much is accurate and clearly lots is left out but it’s a terrific film.
And as I get older noisy restaurants bother me more and more. Not sure I want silent ones though! Deep carpets etc do the trick well enough at least so far.
You might look at "Cybiko" devices on eBay. Also, this "Feature" comparison is amusing:
https://m.xkcd.com/2699/
https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/2699:_Feature_Comparison
Of noisy restaurants and similar locales -- I'd like a jukebox selection where, if the user pays the coin and makes the correct selection, the result is about four minutes of silence. (the "b-side" of such a selection might be "white-noise" a.k.a. mild static) At present the best, often unsatisfactory option is to buy a choice of music.
I mentioned your stove idea in my latest newspaper column, which appears in the Democrat Gazette (Little Rock) and the Telegram (Worcester, MA). I mentioned you plus a solution I found. It's the second item in a multi-item column: https://nwa.pressreader.com/article/282415584134306
For a keyboard on an Iphone, see this iphone case:
https://gizmodo.com/clicks-keyboard-iphone-blackberry-buttons-1851140291
All these ideas are dependent on a lot of other things working perfectly. Particularly electricity. I cook a lot, and regularly use all four burners at different intensities. There is just no substitute for attention, except maybe a factory system.
> An Improved Toilet
I'm pretty sure that would violate regulations about how much water a toilet can use per flush.
The two flush buttons David is referencing on existing toilets is actually to get around this. The law simply requires one button meet the flush regulation so what really happens is everyone just hits both buttons together because we all like our toilets to actually work. The designers even set up the UI to support depressing both together with one hand easily. Best thing you can do, sans getting a commercial pressure toilet, is replace your single button with a double button and you can relive the glories of your youth not having to toilet plunge or snake every other flush.