|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson wrote:
> The convenient thing is that when they start to go bad, you know very
> quickly. Good eggs don't float; bad ones do.
My cookery teacher told me this. Is it actually true?
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 1-12-2009 22:33, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Tue, 01 Dec 2009 13:22:20 -0800, Tim Attwood wrote:
>
>> I've used water glass to keep eggs when refrigeration isn't available,
>> after about a month they start tasting odd though.
>
> The convenient thing is that when they start to go bad, you know very
> quickly. Good eggs don't float; bad ones do.
Hmm, are you deliberately confusing water glass with a glass of water?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 01 Dec 2009 22:11:44 +0000, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Jim Henderson wrote:
>
>> The convenient thing is that when they start to go bad, you know very
>> quickly. Good eggs don't float; bad ones do.
>
> My cookery teacher told me this. Is it actually true?
Yes. Have tried it and it works just fine.
Any reason why you'd think it doesn't work? ;-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 01 Dec 2009 23:28:27 +0100, andrel wrote:
> On 1-12-2009 22:33, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Tue, 01 Dec 2009 13:22:20 -0800, Tim Attwood wrote:
>>
>>> I've used water glass to keep eggs when refrigeration isn't available,
>>> after about a month they start tasting odd though.
>>
>> The convenient thing is that when they start to go bad, you know very
>> quickly. Good eggs don't float; bad ones do.
>
> Hmm, are you deliberately confusing water glass with a glass of water?
Not deliberately, but I do see that I may have done so. ;-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>>> The convenient thing is that when they start to go bad, you know very
>>> quickly. Good eggs don't float; bad ones do.
>> My cookery teacher told me this. Is it actually true?
>
> Yes. Have tried it and it works just fine.
>
> Any reason why you'd think it doesn't work? ;-)
It just seems suspiciously convinient, that's all. ;-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 02/12/2009 10:04, Invisible nous fit lire :
>>>> The convenient thing is that when they start to go bad, you know very
>>>> quickly. Good eggs don't float; bad ones do.
>>> My cookery teacher told me this. Is it actually true?
>>
>> Yes. Have tried it and it works just fine.
>>
>> Any reason why you'd think it doesn't work? ;-)
>
> It just seems suspiciously convinient, that's all. ;-)
It's all physic: eggs have an air volume inside, at one end.
As the egg get older, the volume of the real-egg matter diminish a bit,
leaving more room for air. Like a submarine, emptying the ballast
(filling them with air) has a clear result: making float.
The interesting fact about the hen's egg is that a fresh egg's density
is a bit above the water, and old one's is below. It does not work for
ostrich's egg.
On the other hand, it is also easy to separate boiled egg from normal
one (before breaking them): if you rotate them on a plane, boiled egg
keep rotating, normal one slows down more quickly.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le_Forgeron wrote:
> It's all physic: eggs have an air volume inside, at one end.
> As the egg get older, the volume of the real-egg matter diminish a bit,
> leaving more room for air. Like a submarine, emptying the ballast
> (filling them with air) has a clear result: making float.
>
The variation of internal volumes in the egg would not change the
density... In order to change the density, at least one of two things
must happen:
- matter going in or out
- overall volume changing
It seems to me that the shell of the eggs would prevent both, but then
there might be some permeability or some room for shrinking/expanding.
--
Vincent
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> The variation of internal volumes in the egg would not change the
> density... In order to change the density, at least one of two things
> must happen:
> - matter going in or out
> - overall volume changing
>
> It seems to me that the shell of the eggs would prevent both, but then
> there might be some permeability or some room for shrinking/expanding.
The shell is air-permiable. It has to be; the embrio would suffocate
otherwise.
(It may or may not be water-permiable as well, I'm not sure...)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> The shell is air-permiable. It has to be; the embrio would suffocate
> otherwise.
Maybe some of the internal liquid/solid parts of the egg are decomposed into
gasses which then escape through the shell?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 02 Dec 2009 09:04:32 +0000, Invisible wrote:
>>>> The convenient thing is that when they start to go bad, you know very
>>>> quickly. Good eggs don't float; bad ones do.
>>> My cookery teacher told me this. Is it actually true?
>>
>> Yes. Have tried it and it works just fine.
>>
>> Any reason why you'd think it doesn't work? ;-)
>
> It just seems suspiciously convinient, that's all. ;-)
Sometimes the convenient things are convenient for a reason. ;-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |