Does anyone know if there are any chemical liquids or elements that could be used for ‘boiling’ food, besides oil or water? Specifically something with a high thermal conductance, and non-toxic (heat capacity may be important, but probably a lesser consideration)? As motivation, consider mercury (ignoring toxicity problems): it has a much higher thermal conductivity than water or oil, and its high surface tension prevents it from soaking into food (as oil or water would). I imagine it could do quite a job of heating food more quickly, without the the downside of oiliness or sogginess, and an added bonus of a uniform and quicker sear. First of all (to cooks), would it be as good as it sounds? And are there any substances that have been tried, or would be good candidates for this idea?
Isn’t another problem with mercury the issue that most stuff would float on top of it?
I fear you would run into the problems associated with cooking high viscosity things like pumpkin soup or porridge. They require constant stirring otherwise the stuff at the bottom burns because the liquid doesn’t move.
Good point. Most foods are about the same density (or less dense) than water, so if you cook in an extremely dense fluid only the bottom surface of the food will be in contact with the hot liquid. It’d be like cooking in a frying pan all over again.
But that would be awesome! A frying pan with perfect contact to the contours of whatever you’re making.
I have a recipe for chicken that’s cooked in a thick roux/stock mixture, but it needs constant attention and the chicken cooks pretty slowly. (Faster than pan frying, though.) The bonus is that the liquid becomes an awesome sauce. Artery-destroying, but awesome.
Oil- and water-based liquids are not just for cooking, they also impart flavor. The chemical process of “cooking” has pretty much been mastered. What is it exactly you are trying to accomplish with mercury that can’t already be done with conventional cooking methods?
I’ve heard and read stories about Linotype operators dunking potatoes in the hot type metal (mostly lead) to fix a quick lunch, but I’m not sure I believe them.
Yes, you can cook with D2O, which is denser than water, and non-toxic as long as it doesn’t replace a certain percentage of the water in your body. However, it’s a bit expensive.
Another possibility is glycerin. It’s cheap, readily available, nontoxic, and has a boiling point of 290 °C. Why don’t you go buy some and try it out for us?
This is what a pressure cooker is for.
The problem with a high viscosity liquid is that it doesn’t undergo natural convective flow as well, so while it may conduct heat more readily it will also create areas of significant temperature difference between the heat source and various parts of the idea being cooked. High pressure steam, on the other hand, is a nearly ideal medium for heat transfer at cooking temperatures; hence why it is also used as the working fluid in many large heat exchanger cycles.
Stranger
First of all, to everyone – mercury was an example – I was asking if there is a non-toxic substance, perhaps with other better cooking qualities as well.
Boiling imparts flavor? Who knew. The only thing that imparts flavor, as far as I’m aware, besides ingredients, would be the type of browning. Boiling obviously is terrible for this. Roasting is better, but slower, as heat exchange is radiative or slow conductance through the air. Frying is better, but, well, oily, and oil doesn’t have that high a thermal conductance so perhaps the cooking could be done quicker. So, just as an example, something like mercury would be able to impart browning while also cooking uniformly, and quickly, and without merging in any way with the food. It obviously has downsides that people have mentioned (toxic, food will float in it, needs to be stirred), so how about something else? Gallium, etc?
No.
Stranger
See now that’s what I’m fcuking talking about!
Glycerin might have slightly too low a boiling point, because I am told it decomposes at that temp into pretty toxic stuff. Otherwise I’d give it a try (seriously) and get back to you.
I checked out a couple articles on the thermal characteristics of D20, and I don’t see any advantages (thermal conductivity slightly lower, for example).
I think you’d quickly hit an upper limit on this concept. The boiling liquid is only going to be in contact with the outer surface of your food. A higher density liquid might transfer heat to the food’s surface faster but after that you’re going to be dependent on the food’s internal liquid to transfer heat into the food’s interior. You’ll get into a situation where you’re transferring too much heat into the surface of your food - the heat won’t be able to transfer into the interior fast enough and you’ll be overcooking the surface of your food.
Well, nobody says you have to cook at 290 °C. Why not “boil” the food at a lower temperature? The glycerin itself wouldn’t be literally boiling, but you can still easily reach or exceed water-boiling temperatures with it.
I’d just have to be very careful not to let it get near 290C, otherwise I’d be too afraid to eat my meal. I’d want the temp fairly high though – so I can try to brown the food a little. This would require a thermometer I don’t have. We’ll see if there are any better suggestions.
Agreed, though I’m not sure exactly where that limit is. I’m dreaming of someone coming forward with “Oh yeah, back in grad school at lab X we used to boil potatoes in Y. You could get those puppies done in 1 minute flat! Egon lost consciousness from the fumes though.” A bit different, but ever make ice cream with liquid nitrogen? It works really well!
I second the pressure cooker suggestion. The boiling point of water increases at high pressures, so it seems to be pretty close to what you are looking for. Also if you are concerned about safety issues, modern pressure cookers usually have multiple release valves, as well as some sort of interlock.
Can you get a nice crispy skin in a pressure cooker?
How about hot, molten lava?