When cooking something like a potato, does it make a difference in cooking time if I bring the water to a boil first, then add potato, or bring the water to a boil with the potatoes in? It shouldn’t, right; this is kind of the reverse of the which-freezes-fastest question, meaning that the total amount of energy required to having boiling water + cooked potato is the same no matter what, and assuming I don’t fiddle with the flame (constant energy input) there should be no difference in time to get to cooked potatoes…right?
I’m assuming for this that I throw the potatoes in as soon as the water boils. In real life there would probably be a delay…which is why in real life I start the potatoes in the cold water instead of waiting for the water to boil.
I don’t know about how long it takes to boil, but I do know if you want evenly-cooked potatoes, you start them in cold water. Throwing raw potatoes in boiling water will result in the outside of the potatoes getting mushy before the inside is cooked.
The website Indian links is about cooking vegetables - a potato isn’t strictly a vegetable, it’s a starch, and requires a different method for cooking. For most non-starchy veggies, though, that site looks pretty good.
" I can’t think of a vegetable (or starch) I would boil besides a potato in any event"
Boiling is a very common method of cooking vegetables. How about grren beans, peas, carrots, brussels sprouts, broccoli, cauliflower to name just a few.
Personally, I steam, blanch, or roast most of those. Much better than boiling IMO. I guess blanching could be considered boiling, but I can’t remember the last time I actually boiled a vegetable until it was soft.
No - experience suggests otherwise. I’m saying that “method x cooks evenly” and “cut smaller for faster cooking” seem a little contradictory to one another.
Once you hit boiling, it is no longer a closed system (nor was it strictly so before, but it was a lot closer). If you have just a pot of boiling water, the energy added pretty much goes to producing steam. If you throw a potato in there, some of the energy that was making steam, now goes to heating the potato and less steam is produced. If you slice up the potato, increasing heat transfer, even more energy goes into the potato and even less to making steam.
I’m having trouble with why you thing these two statements contradict each other. Regardless of size, the potatoes will cook more evenly when started in cold water. Dropping in boiling water will result in an overcooked outside and undercooked inside of the potato piece.
Larger potato pieces will take longer to cook through than smaller pieces. Two separate statements.
Yes, since you are cooking in boiling water blanching is boiling. And as to "I can’t remember the last time I actually boiled a vegetable until it was soft. ", neither can I although I boil vegetables all the time. I can’t remember the last time I roasted meat until it was overcooked either.
Yes, that’s what I do–steam them when I want that effect/consistency. Which in fact I did last night with the cauliflower I used to make potato/cauliflower mash.
I was going to post basically what Hockey Monkey said, but I do have a quibble.
Smaller pieces of potato will also cook more evenly than larger pieces, since there is less distance/mass between the outside and the center.
For example, I generally add potatoes (1" cube) to boiling/simmering stock when making soup. They cook just fine, because they’re small enough that the mass and temp differential from edge to center isn’t very large.
The problem is getting all of the mass to heat at the same rate, when you are only applying heat to the outside surfaces. It’s the same reason you bring a roast up to room temperature before putting it into the oven.
