I don't understand the physics of "twice fried chicken".

I know I like the tasty result, I just don’t understand the physics.
So you fry the chicken, pull it out of the oil for a minute or two, and then back into the oil for another 8 minutes or so. The end result being, extra crispy fried chicken.
What I don’t get is: Why can’t I just leave the chicken in the oil for an extra 8 minutes and get the same result? What does the act of pulling it out and then re submerging it actually do?
Anyone know the science behind this?

I’d guess the break reduces the heat transferred to the inside of the piece. So crispier skin without overcooking the chicken

exactly it “rests the chicken” and cools it off internally

Or it could be that you actually will get the same result if you just leave it for the additional eight minutes. Although a lot of “it’s important that you do this” steps in recipes actually have an effect, there’s also a lot of confirmation bias and things that don’t actually make a noticeable difference. Few chefs do double blind tests, and if you think it’ll make a difference to try adding the eggs to your pancakes alternating between yolks and whites, you’re not going to be an unbiased judge on the effect or lack of one on the final product.

Works with French fried pataters.

I’ve heard chefs explain that cooling allows moisture trapped under the cooked exterior of the potato to reach the surface. Indeed when you drop the fries the second time you get “boiling” of the oil (due to water release).

This allows the oil to penetrate the surface and crisp the fry up a bit deeper.

I’ve done comparisons with French fries. Huge difference.

And whip those egg whites a bit, then fold into your batter. You’ll thank me.

Here’s Serious Eat’s answer, but they call for longer than just leaving it out for a couple minutes:

I don’t know about twice-fried chicken, but when you double-fry French fries you’re supposed to do it at two different oil temperatures. The first time time the oil should be relatively cool, so the potatoes can cook all the way through without burning. The second time the oil is hotter and you cook the fries for a shorter period, which browns the outsides.

My fiancee has tried that, and tried just adding the whole eggs and has decided on skipping the “whip just the whites”. Do a blind test and come back to me on how much of an objective difference there is.

Objectively, the whipped whites adds some height to the finished pancake. Subjectively, I don’t think there’s a real improvement in taste. But I do like the plated appearance when using whipped egg whites.

Serious Eats has a side-by-side comparison between pancakes with whipped whites vs pancakes with whole eggs. There is an obvious difference in texture.

Cook’s Illustrated/America’s Test Kitchen actually does a lot of the tests you mention- to determine what steps are really necessary in any given recipe. The published a recipe for twice fried korean style chicken wings and found the two-stage process was critical to the overall success of the dish.

Unfortunately the recipe is behind a paywall, but I’ll post the article in case you have an account or want to sign up for a free trial.

There definitely is a difference. IT’s not a difference I prefer, though, so I stick to my regular recipe of self-rising flour (or flour+baking powder+a little salt) + sugar + oil + whole egg + milk.