/ck/ - Food & Cooking

>>9558038
Do you mean "denser" anon? That's easily explained by geometry.

Both are "whole grain" because that's a legal term for food. It means the whole grain was used to make the dish. Not that the grain remains whole in the form in the package.

Any other babby-tier shitposts, OP?

>>9558038
because steel is heavier than a dinner roll

steel cut oats have little bits of steel left in them after the cutting, that's why they're heavier

water content

>>9558066
what a stupid answer, it's obviously not water content retard
it's steel content, that's why they're STEEL cut oats
they aren't normal cut oats, but cut oats made of steel

I should have some steel cut oats now that you mention it
my kidneys are a little sore so I probably need some fiber

>>9558038
Steel cut oats are for homosexuals and women, so they naturally retain water.

>>9558086
steel isn't fiber

>>9558086
I heard celery is breddy good for kidneys.

>>9558051
>density is easily explained by geometry
>doesn't explain it
>density is weight per volume which has nothing to do with geometry
Get a load of this faggot!

>>9558132
volume is literally a geometrical quantity

>>9558132
>density is weight per volume which has nothing to do with geometry
>weight
Is this the result of American education?

>>9558132
Holy shit you can't be this stupid

>>9558142
Mass, however is not a geometric quantity

>>9558142
>geometrical

This thread

>>9558132
>density is weight per volume

>>9558144
>>9558146
>>9558158
>eurotards are so insecure they have to resort to semantic games to make themselves feel better

aren't steel cut oats just less processed? so the oats have a higher density, and more compact volume because less air in the container?

>>9558142
>being this fucking retarded
In the year of our lord, two thousand and seventeen

>>9558174
>t. butthurt ameritard

>>9558182
yes, everyone else in this thread is a moron

>>9558186
How is it not?

>>9558174

>>9558192
Density is Mass over Volume
Mass is not a geometric quantity
Therefore density is not a geometric quantity

Volume is both a geometric and physical quantity
Mass is a physical quantity
Therefore density is a physical quantity

we /sci/ now

>>9558132
this is impressively retarded

>>9558216
>Mass is not a geometric quantity
But volume is a geometric quantity. It derives from distance^3.

>Volume is both a geometric and physical quantity
Nope. It's purely geometric. Units of volume derive from distance cubed. I.e. 1 mL is one cubic centimeter.

>>9558287
Just because a unit can be derived from a non physical means doesn't mean it isn't a physical property of an object.
If I gave you a cube and asked you to find the mass through geometric measuments you would be unable to do it.
However, if you gave me a cube and asked me to measure it's volume without the use of any geometric measuments, I would be able to do it with ease, by simply placing it in some water and measuring it's displacement

>>9558086
>>9558105
Neither of you have any idea what kidneys do

>>9558038
Because there is a different volume of product and the products are probably packaged on the same line, which means that they have to use the same size container.

>>9558287
This guy BTFO by >>9558330
Sorry >>9558287, but you're fucking retarded.

Care to tell us more about steel cut oats, faggot?

because steel is heavier than feathers

>>9558534
hey /r/4chan

>>9558330
"physical property of an object" is meaningless in this context.

>>If I gave you a cube and asked you to find the mass through geometric measuments you would be unable to do it.
Indeed. I'm not sure what your point is though.

>> I would be able to do it with ease, by simply placing it in some water and measuring it's displacement
Displacement is a measure of volume. Volume derives from geometric measurements.

Are you totally unaware of the concept that some units are fundamental and other units are derived from those units? And why is this even relevant at all?

Steel cut oats are denser than rolled oats, so a similar size container will clearly weigh more. I'm not sure what the discussion of "physical properties" has to do with any of that.

>>9558553
But anon, rolled oats are more dense because they have been squished. You see, you're fucking retarded.

so why are they heavier?

>>9558150
Mass is very much a geometrical quantity. It can be stated in a purely geometrical form (-p•p) that is valid in any metric space (here I use '•', but feel free to insert a metric tensor of your choice to make it appropriate to any manifold with metric topology). Volume however, cannot be expressed in a coordinate-invariant way, and thus not a geometrical quantity.

More steel cut oats can fit in a space than old fashioned. Like how 40 grams of steal cut is about 1/4 cup but 40 grams of old fashioned is 1/2 cup.

>>9558776
Shreds of steel from the knives poeple use to cut the oats with come off and get in the package. That’s why I always eat a big bowl of oatmeal before I do anything scary or difficult, to steel myself for a struggle.

>>9558811
>More steel cut oats can fit in a space than old fashioned
Why? That doesn't make sense. Old fashioned oats have been rolled - or squished. They should be more dense.

>>9558973
they're probably able to be packed a lot more, but in terms of settling naturally I would think the steel cut would be able to do so more efficiently

>>9558038
It would be great if someone could actually answer this question without the fucking neckbeard bullshit "hurr durr, muh density" cop out.

Yeah, we get it. things that are more dense weigh more per unit volume. The question is, why would steel cut oat weigh more than rolled old fashioned. They are both oats, and of the two preparations, you'd expect the rolled oats to be more dense.

Hint: This is more of a 3 dimensional bin packing problem than a density problem. You'll need to know the coefficient of friction between rolled oats and steel cut oats to solve for X and their relative pack spacing. (protip: this has nothing to do with density)

>>9558038
because steel is heavier

What the fuck? Why is this thread all over the place?

>>9558973
Think of it like this, you can fit more sand than unsquished leaves in the area. The little bits of steel cut will fill all of the space while the old fashion will have blank space.

My guess as to why they are considered wholemeal is because oat bran is inedible and therefore not considered part of the food grain?

>>9559006
Hey are you sure it's not because rolled oats are steamed and may retain ever so slightly more moisture than steel cut?

>>9559315
What on God's green earth is that

>>9558801

BTFO

I only into scalars and vectors but that coordinate shit always tickles me.

>>9559876
a twerky

>>9559315
Twerky.webm

People really eat oats that have bits of steel in it?

What the fuck

>>9560124
kek

>>9560193
yes americans really do this

>>9560124
And this is a Twerkey.

>>9558132
I honestly can't tell if this guy is retarded or just pretending to be retarded. Also You post that exact image with that exact title in /wt/ on /g/ and you are equally retarded there as well.

>>9562389
>Also You post that exact image with that exact title in /wt/ on /g/ and you are equally retarded there as well.
>weak bait
Mfw I don't even know what those boards are.

>>9560193
How else would you get iron, idiot

>>9559034
B-but they're both whole grain

How can they both be whole grain, if they are different weights for the same volume? SOMETHING HAS TO BE MISSING.

THIS MAKES NO SENSE. I NEED AN ADULT.