/ck/ - Food & Cooking

Convenience.

“Weight” is different based on local gravitational forces. Mass is more uniform.

Because otherwise you'll make mistakes when you cook on other planets.

>>14262554
Limited space.

>>14262556
Bullshit. Measuring by weight is far easier and 1000x more accurate.

>>14262558
This guy is right, whenever I measure out my rice on the moon, volume is the way to go!

>>14262559
Maybe it’s just because I’ve been on a space documentary binge recently, but I laughed harder at this than I should have.

>>14262567
Bullshit it's easier. The thing about volume is you very quickly learn to eyeball it.

>>14262571
you pour out ingredients from the bag into 1 bowl retard. with measuring cups you literally multiple the amount of dishes you have to do

>>14262570
You do realize that there are measurable weight differences around the world depending on altitude, right? Not much when weighing a person, but with something such as cooking it could affect things, especially when measuring out baking soda and the likes.

>>14262571
Ye bro I'm really good at measuring 0,35 cups by eyeballing, Just shut the fuck up you amerilardmutt faglord go drink mayonnaise you dense stupid limey cunt

>>14262583
This is good bait.

>>14262585
based

>>14262581
>washing measuring cups is hard
retard

>>14262583
Thanks for the (you), I appreciate it.

>>14262585
you can eyeball volume because it takes up a certain amount of space
you cannot eyeball weight because of varying densities

>>14262554
>add 1 teaspoon salt
>add 4.76666666667 grams salt
Do yuropoors really own drug dealer scales?

>>14262595
>treating replies like “upvotes”
Go back
>>>/r/eddit

>>14262611
>you can't feel weight in your hand
retard

>>14262619
>you can eyeball things with your hand
no u

>>14262593
im not the retard, retard

>>14262567
>take measuring device such as a cup
>put ingredients into the cup
>voila
vs
>take measuring device
>get a scale
>place measuring device on scale
>tare scale
>add ingredients in
>add and remove ingredients to get the perfect weight

boy that sure was far easier

>>14262614
Thanks again for the (you) kind stranger.

>>14262622
yes, you can you fucking idiot.

>>14262583

g = GM/r2

sea level = 9.8m/s^2
on top of mount everest = 9.79m/s^2

1g will weigh about .01g less on top of mt Everest. That is well within the margin of error of your food scale. Elevation literally doesn't matter.

>>14262631
show me a person who has eyes in their hand

>>14262615
Obviously, cooking is an art of precision.
But that's besides the point. We have teaspoons too.

>>14262633
Damn bro you doing all that explaining, thanks this is really great and useful. Could you please explain Pythagoras for me too? I just can't understand it, and when I do, I often forget.

>>14262647

I'm gonna come over your house, fuck you in the ass and cook you some delicious pancakes.

>>14262638

human neurological system

>>14262670
Yes please pancake-san fuck my ass

>>14262672
kek

I travel.
Space is at a premium.
Scales are somewhat fragile.

I literally have a small plastic leftover container that I use as a measuring cup (1/2c size). That is all the measuring I do (rice, water for rice).

>measuring

>>14264576
this

>>14264570
real balanced diet, brainiac

>>14262554
I like scoopin’

>>14264576
I bet these guys measure rice and water when they cook rice and not use their knuckles

>>14262567
>Measuring by weight is far easier and 1000x more accurate.
And only really practical in the last couple of years with the glut of cheap and readily available kitchen scales.
I agree with you though, It's retarded that home cooks have relied on volume for measuring for hundreds of thousands of years instead of using prohibitively expensive and scarce for the time scales or modern digital scales.
What kind of ancient roman faggot didn't order a $20 kitchen scale off of amazon? I mean really.

>>14262625
>>14264946
>you can only measure weight with scales
Do Americans really not know measuring jugs are a thing?

>>14265000
You're still just measuring by volume retard, it doesn't matter if the container says grams

>>14265017
>it doesn't matter if the container says grams
That's the only point of these containers actually; to measure the precise weight of various substances through volume.
So in the end you're still calculating weight, how is that hard to understand?

>>14265053
mas

>>14265053
If you can measure weight through volume without a scale, then what's the problem with just measuring volume?

>>14262585
35 is just just half of a half + 10 not that hard to put together if youre familiar with a recipe

>>14265068
As long as it gives you accurate measurements I don't mind, personally. But it often doesn't, that's why cups are for home cooks and professionals (in baking for instance) always measure by weight.

>>14262570
Just use a balance scale

>>14262554
For convenience, but it's not a good one IMO. Like eyeballing, it's ok only if you are used to the recipe, the amounts and the cookware, which is the average homecook situation. But should any of those parameters change, by weight is safer and less hassle, but the average homecook will never experience it as it requires to know the proportions by weight beforehand.

>>14262554
Because I don't need to break out my drug scale when I wanna bake something

>>14262554
It upsets fartknockers such as yourself.

>recipe calls for "cups" of a non-liquid or seasoning
Fuck them up their stupid ass.

Still want to know why seemingly every damn recipe has 16 servings like I'm a god damn Mexican family.

>>14262625
>Have to measure 6 cups for a cake
>Scoop, pour, scoop, pour...
Weighing is far easier in this scenario
Also, one that I really hate
>2 tablespoons of melted butter please ;)
Yeah, because I can easily just scoop my fucking solid butter stick holy shit. I've memorised that a tablespoon of butter is about 14-15g. So much easier to weigh that shit.

I only measure when I'm baking, and I eyeball when just cooking. Cooking is an art and baking is a science after all

>>14264777
I eat other stuff too.
But the rice, it works when i do 1 scoop of rice and 2 scoops of water. I'm pretty dumb, and also can't be arsed to figure out how to not measure to get the ratio close.
The other stuff doesn't need measuring.
And no, I am not using a rice cooker with a pot that has the measuring lines stamped in the side; not cooking in a big measure cup.

>>14262569
I can smell the soy from here

>>14262611
>you can eyeball volume because it takes up a certain amount of space
>you cannot eyeball weight because of varying densities
Is this bait? Density affects the measurement of volume, not weight. This is also why flours with different compositions occupy different volumes for the same weight.

>>14265053
It only works for liquids because most food grade liquids are the same density as water. Try measuring 300 grams of vodka with that thing.

>>14265827
Who measures liquids in grams though

>>14262554
It's convenience for water or liquids that are mostly water.
1 ml = 1 gram of water

>>14265053
>What is density hur dur

>>14262559
That said, cooking on other planets will need a lot of adaptations because of lower atmospheric pressure, different atmosphere, different gravity, etc.
And you should be able to make fun things in zero-G, like baking a cake without a mold in an oven. What would happen to your meat juices if they don't fall and just stay attached to the meat? You won't get a nice sauce, but savor will be concentrated on the skin

>>14262554
Volume is useful if you're buying a speaker

>>14262554
There are certain things that you really don't need to be 100% accurate about. When I cook rice, I just measure rice and water by volume. Why would you weigh that?