2tbsp

[Harrison Hill]

Our Lidl's Balti says "...add 2tbsp [sic] to the rice, stir and re-cover". I don't think I have seen a "tbsp" for 20 years - a bit of my childhood English living on in German packaging. Whatever happened to SI units.

[jcd...@gmail.com]

On Friday, July 10, 2015 at 9:57:07 AM UTC-7, Harrison Hill wrote:
> Our Lidl's Balti says "...add 2tbsp [sic] to the rice, stir and re-cover". I don't think I have seen a "tbsp" for 20 years - a bit of my childhood English living on in German packaging. Whatever happened to SI units.

2 tbsp is standard recipe nomenclature on this side of the pond.

jc

[Pierre Jelenc]

In article <947840a7-fbca-438e...@googlegroups.com>,

2tbsp = 30 ml in SI. Nothing mysterious or arcane about it.

Pierre
--
Pierre Jelenc
The Gigometer www.gigometer.com
The NYC Beer Guide www.nycbeer.org

[musika]

On 10/07/2015 18:57, Pierre Jelenc wrote:
> In article <947840a7-fbca-438e...@googlegroups.com>,
> Harrison Hill <harrison...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Our Lidl's Balti says "...add 2tbsp [sic] to the rice, stir and
>> re-cover". I don't think I have seen a "tbsp" for 20 years - a bit of my
>> childhood English living on in German packaging. Whatever happened to SI
>> units.
>
> 2tbsp = 30 ml in SI. Nothing mysterious or arcane about it.
>

Oh, but there is.

1 UK tbsp = 17.7581714ml
1 US tbsp = 14.7867648ml

--
Ray
UK

[Lanarcam]

And the rocket blows up...

[Adam Funk]

Is that official? I thought it was 15 ml in both places.

I've definitely seen it stated clearly in the UK (on liquid
medication, for example) that a teaspoon is 5 ml. And I think
everyone in the UK thinks 1 tablespoon = 3 teaspoons & 1 dessert spoon
[1] is 2 teaspoons.


[1] I guess they should be all unspaced, or all hyphenated, or all
spaced, but "dessertspoon" looks funny to me.


--
"It is the role of librarians to keep government running in difficult
times," replied Dramoren. "Librarians are the last line of defence
against chaos." (McMullen 2001)

[Adam Funk]

European recipes (including British, for this purpose) sensibly use
weight for solids in reasonably weighable quantities, unlike the
American persistence in things like "1 cup of flour", but I think the
analogous measurements are also currently used in Germany & France (as
well as the UK) for small quantities of solids (where a normal kitchen
scale wouldn't be practical).

I don't have any contemporary French cookbooks to check, though.
OTOH, my _Larousse Cuisine Moderne et Gastronomie_ (1967) has a kind
of backwards table of the volumes of spoons, glasses, & cups:

1 décilitre de liquide égale

5 cuillerées à soupe
10 cuillerées à entremets
20 cuillerées à café
3/4 de verre à bordeaux
2 verres à madère
4 verres à liqueur
2/3 de tasse à thé
3/4 de tasse à café
1 1/2 de tasse à moka

[Mike Barnes]

In the UK, tbsp are commonplace in recipes. We have measuring spoons,
and everyone knows that 1 tbsp = 15 ml (and 1 tsp = 5 ml). Near enough,
even for baking.

--
Mike Barnes
Cheshire, England

[R H Draney]

musika <mUs...@NOSPAMexcite.com> wrote in
news:mnp1sd$77l$1...@dont-email.me:

Those Brits are well-known for their bigger tables, going all the way back
to King Arthur....r

[Garrett Wollman]

In article <mnp1sd$77l$1...@dont-email.me>,

musika <mus...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>Oh, but there is.
>
>1 UK tbsp = 17.7581714ml
>1 US tbsp = 14.7867648ml

1 US tbsp (which I would abbreviate "tbl", but anyway) is 1/16 cup,
and for food labeling purposes, 1 cup is officially, legally defined
as 240 ml, hence 1 US tbsp = 15 ml (exactly).

The value you give is correct if you use the traditional definition of
a cup as 8 fluid ounces (half a pint), which is a bit smaller, about
236 ml.

-GAWollman

--
Garrett A. Wollman | What intellectual phenomenon can be older, or more oft
wol...@bimajority.org| repeated, than the story of a large research program
Opinions not shared by| that impaled itself upon a false central assumption
my employers. | accepted by all practitioners? - S.J. Gould, 1993

[musika]

On 10/07/2015 22:38, Garrett Wollman wrote:
> In article <mnp1sd$77l$1...@dont-email.me>,
> musika <mus...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>> Oh, but there is.
>>
>> 1 UK tbsp = 17.7581714ml
>> 1 US tbsp = 14.7867648ml
>
> 1 US tbsp (which I would abbreviate "tbl", but anyway) is 1/16 cup,
> and for food labeling purposes, 1 cup is officially, legally defined
> as 240 ml, hence 1 US tbsp = 15 ml (exactly).
>

Yes, that's a metric tablespoon as found in measuring-spoon sets. It is
quite likely that modern tablespoons are also 15ml - I have some.
I also have some older tablespoons which are larger.

> The value you give is correct if you use the traditional definition of
> a cup as 8 fluid ounces (half a pint), which is a bit smaller, about
> 236 ml.
>

Well, for me, 10 fl. oz. is half a pint.

My point was that tablespoon may not be an accurate measure whereas ml is.
--
Ray
UK

[Tony Cooper]

On Fri, 10 Jul 2015 20:50:46 +0100, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com>
wrote:

>On 2015-07-10, Harrison Hill wrote:
>
>> Our Lidl's Balti says "...add 2tbsp [sic] to the rice, stir and
>> re-cover". I don't think I have seen a "tbsp" for 20 years - a bit
>> of my childhood English living on in German packaging. Whatever
>> happened to SI units.
>
>
>European recipes (including British, for this purpose) sensibly use
>weight for solids in reasonably weighable quantities, unlike the
>American persistence in things like "1 cup of flour",

I'm no cook, but I don't see that as being all that more "sensible".
The few times I want a (unit) of something, it's quite easy to grab a
measuring spoon or measuring cup. A scale is just something else keep
out on the counter.

Cooks like my wife would have to make adjustments. She adds a
teaspoon of something by sight rather than by measurement. She has a
good enough idea of what a (unit) of salt is without measuring. She'd
have to re-learn what (x) grams of salt would be.

--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

[snide...@gmail.com]

On Friday, July 10, 2015 at 2:38:36 PM UTC-7, Garrett Wollman wrote:
> In article <mnp1sd$77l$1...@dont-email.me>,
> musika <mus...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> >Oh, but there is.
> >
> >1 UK tbsp = 17.7581714ml
> >1 US tbsp = 14.7867648ml
>
> 1 US tbsp (which I would abbreviate "tbl", but anyway) is 1/16 cup,

Your abbreviation clashes with most cook books and newspaper recipes
I have seen Out West Here, including the PBS programs by Cooks something-or-other,
sponsored by King Arthur Flour.

> and for food labeling purposes, 1 cup is officially, legally defined
> as 240 ml, hence 1 US tbsp = 15 ml (exactly).
>
> The value you give is correct if you use the traditional definition of
> a cup as 8 fluid ounces (half a pint), which is a bit smaller, about
> 236 ml.
>
> -GAWollman
>

Grade inflation leads to tablespoon inflation, eh?

/dps

[Robert Bannister]

A round of table, a round of bread, a round of golf.

An Australian tablespoonful is apparently 20 mL. I thought it was 25 mL.

--
Robert Bannister
Perth, Western Australia

[Robert Bannister]

I thought salt was always measured either by the pinch or "according to
taste".

[ErrolC]

On Saturday, 11 July 2015 13:01:20 UTC+12, Robert Bannister wrote:
<Snip>

>
> A round of table, a round of bread, a round of golf.
>
> An Australian tablespoonful is apparently 20 mL. I thought it was 25 mL.
>

A New Zealand tbsp is 15ml, except when you are using an Australian
cookbook. Check the front/back of any unfamiliar cookbook for
definitions!

--
Errol Cavit

[Peter Moylan]

An Australian tablespoon is a bit bigger than that, I think. But in any
case what Harrison needs to know is the size of a German tablespoon,
which is probably different yet again.

--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia

[Will Parsons]

Your wife has the right idea. There have been other posts on what
exactly a tablespoon/teaspoon is in grams, but for cooking purposes,
it doesn't really matter.

--
Will

[Richard Tobin]

In article <mnp1sd$77l$1...@dont-email.me>,
musika <mus...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

>1 UK tbsp = 17.7581714ml

What makes you think that? Presumably you intend it to be 1/32 pint,
but I have never seen that definition used in Britain. I have seen it
described as 1/2 fluid ounce, but that would be 14.2 ml in Britain.
The usual definition is 15 ml.

-- Richard

[Charles Hope]

In article <mnqgav$mmc$1...@macpro.inf.ed.ac.uk>,

According to Mrs Beaton, "the British measuring tablespoon has a capacity
of 1/32 of the Imperial pint. Three British Standard teaspoons equal the
capacity of on British Standard tablespoon. The Americam & Canadian
measuring spoons are slightly smaller in capacity."

It looks as though - from the weight tables given later - that the ratio is
5/4.

[Mike Barnes]

Charles Hope wrote:
> In article <mnqgav$mmc$1...@macpro.inf.ed.ac.uk>,
> Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
>> In article <mnp1sd$77l$1...@dont-email.me>,
>> musika <mus...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>> 1 UK tbsp = 17.7581714ml
>
>> What makes you think that? Presumably you intend it to be 1/32 pint,
>> but I have never seen that definition used in Britain. I have seen it
>> described as 1/2 fluid ounce, but that would be 14.2 ml in Britain.
>> The usual definition is 15 ml.
>
>
> According to Mrs Beaton, "the British measuring tablespoon has a capacity
> of 1/32 of the Imperial pint.

That might have been true 150 years ago. It's not true today.

> Three British Standard teaspoons equal the
> capacity of on British Standard tablespoon.

That is still so.

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

On Fri, 10 Jul 2015 20:41:27 +0100, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com>
wrote:

>On 2015-07-10, musika wrote:
>
>> On 10/07/2015 18:57, Pierre Jelenc wrote:
>>> In article <947840a7-fbca-438e...@googlegroups.com>,
>>> Harrison Hill <harrison...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Our Lidl's Balti says "...add 2tbsp [sic] to the rice, stir and
>>>> re-cover". I don't think I have seen a "tbsp" for 20 years - a bit of my
>>>> childhood English living on in German packaging. Whatever happened to SI
>>>> units.
>>>
>>> 2tbsp = 30 ml in SI. Nothing mysterious or arcane about it.
>>>
>> Oh, but there is.
>>
>> 1 UK tbsp = 17.7581714ml
>> 1 US tbsp = 14.7867648ml
>
>Is that official? I thought it was 15 ml in both places.
>
>I've definitely seen it stated clearly in the UK (on liquid
>medication, for example) that a teaspoon is 5 ml.

Yes. As this says:
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/teaspoon

(abbreviation: tsp) The amount held by a teaspoon, in the UK
considered to be 5 millilitres when used as a measurement in
cookery.

> And I think
>everyone in the UK thinks 1 tablespoon = 3 teaspoons & 1 dessert spoon
>[1] is 2 teaspoons.
>
>
>[1] I guess they should be all unspaced, or all hyphenated, or all
> spaced, but "dessertspoon" looks funny to me.

--

Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

On Sat, 11 Jul 2015 11:13:06 +0100, Mike Barnes
<mikeba...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Charles Hope wrote:
>> In article <mnqgav$mmc$1...@macpro.inf.ed.ac.uk>,
>> Richard Tobin <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
>>> In article <mnp1sd$77l$1...@dont-email.me>,
>>> musika <mus...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>> 1 UK tbsp = 17.7581714ml
>>
>>> What makes you think that? Presumably you intend it to be 1/32 pint,
>>> but I have never seen that definition used in Britain. I have seen it
>>> described as 1/2 fluid ounce, but that would be 14.2 ml in Britain.
>>> The usual definition is 15 ml.
>>
>>
>> According to Mrs Beaton, "the British measuring tablespoon has a capacity
>> of 1/32 of the Imperial pint.
>
>That might have been true 150 years ago. It's not true today.

Therer is history, or perhaps HISTORY:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teaspoon

>
> > Three British Standard teaspoons equal the
>> capacity of on British Standard tablespoon.
>
>That is still so.

--

[spuorg...@gowanhill.com]

If you put an amount in ml people would either worry about finding a measuring spoon (which is possibly not the sort of utensil owned by people who consume ready meals, whether Lidl or any other sort) or they'd get confused with megalitres and tip in half a kettle-full and then complain to Lidl that their rice was soggy.

Teaspoons and tablespoons are adequately precise for many culinary purposes and generally well-understood by the British ready-meal-consuming public.

Owain

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Saturday, July 11, 2015 at 7:38:37 AM UTC-4, spuorg...@gowanhill.com wrote:
> On Friday, 10 July 2015 17:57:07 UTC+1, Harrison Hill wrote:

> > Our Lidl's Balti says "...add 2tbsp [sic] to the rice, stir and re-cover".
> > I don't think I have seen a "tbsp" for 20 years - a bit of my childhood
> > English living on in German packaging. Whatever happened to SI units.
>
> If you put an amount in ml people would either worry about finding a measuring spoon (which is possibly not the sort of utensil owned by people who consume ready meals, whether Lidl or any other sort) or they'd get confused with megalitres and tip in half a kettle-full and then complain to Lidl that their rice was soggy.

You must have some pretty damn big kettles. A 60 Ml kettle would hold 15,850+
US gallons, 13,198+ UK gallons. (2 tbsp = 30 ml; you postulate a kettle twice
that size but read M for m.)

> Teaspoons and tablespoons are adequately precise for many culinary purposes and generally well-understood by the British ready-meal-consuming public.

What do they have to do with "ready-meals," which I assume are something like
"TV dinners" or "frozen entrees"? What sort of measuring would you need to do
to add what sort of ingredient?

[Charles Hope]

In article <2bd30efc-1225-4b39...@googlegroups.com>, Peter

Add water to rice. Put in too much and you'd get a soggy result. But,
perhasp you like rice that way.

[pensive hamster]

On Saturday, 11 July 2015 13:54:14 UTC+1, Peter T. Daniels wrote:

Some ready meals, such as frozen curries ("Our Lidl's Balti"),
in their heating advice on the packet, advise adding 2 tbsp or
so of water to the rice when you heat it in the microwave or
in the oven, either at the begining of heating, or halfway through,
when you stir the product. It isn't exactly haute cuisine.

15,850+ US gallons would, I agree, be excessive. Especially
if you live high up in a block of flats.

[Tony Cooper]

On Sat, 11 Jul 2015 07:45:31 -0700 (PDT), pensive hamster
<pensive...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:

>Some ready meals, such as frozen curries ("Our Lidl's Balti"),
>in their heating advice on the packet, advise adding 2 tbsp or
>so of water to the rice when you heat it in the microwave or
>in the oven, either at the begining of heating, or halfway through,
>when you stir the product. It isn't exactly haute cuisine.

I am not one of those men who cooks. I gave it try a while back, but
I'm the type to rigidly follow directions. If the recipe calls for
one cup of flour, I have to use a measuring cup and I carefully fill
it exactly to the brim or line of one cup. It it says bake for 60
minutes at 350 degrees, I pre-heat the oven and set the timer.
Fifty-nine or sixty-one minutes is not acceptable.

It was far too much work for the results, so I gave it up.

But, even I would splash in an approximation of 2 tablespoons of water
to one of those pre-prepared things described above. I wouldn't get
out the measuring spoons.

[Janet]

In article <c3i0qa5dm510e7ada...@4ax.com>, tonycooper214
@gmail.com says...

>
> On Fri, 10 Jul 2015 20:50:46 +0100, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com>
> wrote:
>
> >On 2015-07-10, Harrison Hill wrote:
> >
> >> Our Lidl's Balti says "...add 2tbsp [sic] to the rice, stir and
> >> re-cover". I don't think I have seen a "tbsp" for 20 years - a bit
> >> of my childhood English living on in German packaging. Whatever
> >> happened to SI units.


> >
> >
> >European recipes (including British, for this purpose) sensibly use
> >weight for solids in reasonably weighable quantities, unlike the
> >American persistence in things like "1 cup of flour",
>
> I'm no cook, but I don't see that as being all that more "sensible".

If you were a cook, you'd know it is.

> The few times I want a (unit) of something, it's quite easy to grab a
> measuring spoon or measuring cup.

So, is that a smoothed-level cup or a heaped one?

> A scale is just something else keep
> out on the counter.

My digital scale is the size of a slim paperback, takes up hardly any
space in a drawer or cupboard, weighs anything from 5 grams to 11 pounds
in metric or imperial, dry or fluid weights at the push of a button;
plus it tares to zero so can measure/weigh IN the mixing bowl or pan,
over and over again; IOW it measure/weighs each addition to the recipe.


Janet.

[Ian Noble]

Anyone below a certain age thinks that. Everyone over a certain age,
knows that it used to be 4 teaspoons = 2 desert spoons = 1 tablespoon
here. The dividing line is somewhere between the end of the war and
the beginnings of formal metrication in 1965. If you have old,
practical UK cutlery from before that era (e.g. the near-ubiquitous
old "fiddle handle" spoons), the above is likely to be true. If you
have more recently-manufactured measures, the metric quantities
probably apply. My mother's old post-war cook-book definitely still
quoted the older relationship.

(We've definitely been here before. Possibly more than once.)

Cheers - Ian
(BrE: Yorks., Hants.)

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[Peter T. Daniels]

The formula for cooking rice is IIRC equal volumes of water and rice (it may
be twice the water, I haven't made rice since I've needed to avoid carbs).
15 ml of water -- 1 T -- wouldn't get you much rice (even if it was some
sort of pre-cooked stuff).

But the point of a TV dinner or a frozen entree is that you just stick it in
the microwave for a few minutes, no adding anything. Some stirring may be needed.

[Robin Bignall]

On Sat, 11 Jul 2015 09:01:13 +0800, Robert Bannister
<rob...@clubtelco.com> wrote:

>On 11/07/2015 5:26 am, R H Draney wrote:
>> musika <mUs...@NOSPAMexcite.com> wrote in
>> news:mnp1sd$77l$1...@dont-email.me:
>>
>>> On 10/07/2015 18:57, Pierre Jelenc wrote:
>>>>
>>>> 2tbsp = 30 ml in SI. Nothing mysterious or arcane about it.
>>>>
>>> Oh, but there is.
>>>
>>> 1 UK tbsp = 17.7581714ml
>>> 1 US tbsp = 14.7867648ml
>>
>> Those Brits are well-known for their bigger tables, going all the way back
>> to King Arthur....r
>>
>
>A round of table, a round of bread, a round of golf.
>

A round of drinks. Cheers.

>An Australian tablespoonful is apparently 20 mL. I thought it was 25 mL.
--

Robin Bignall
Herts, England (BrE)

[Stan Brown]

On Fri, 10 Jul 2015 21:38:32 +0000 (UTC), Garrett Wollman wrote:
>
> In article <mnp1sd$77l$1...@dont-email.me>,
> musika <mus...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> >Oh, but there is.
> >
> >1 UK tbsp = 17.7581714ml
> >1 US tbsp = 14.7867648ml
>
> 1 US tbsp (which I would abbreviate "tbl", but anyway) is 1/16 cup,
> and for food labeling purposes, 1 cup is officially, legally defined
> as 240 ml, hence 1 US tbsp = 15 ml (exactly).
>
> The value you give is correct if you use the traditional definition of
> a cup as 8 fluid ounces (half a pint), which is a bit smaller, about
> 236 ml.

I have a set of measuring spoons that I've had for decades. They're
some thin, light metal, I'm guessing stainless steel. The bowl of the
tablespoon is stamped "1 TBSP / FOLEY / 15 ML", and the teaspoon "1
TSP / 5 ML".

Anyway, the difference between measurements based on 1 cup = 240 ml
and 1 cup = 236 ml is less than 2%. That's (a) unlikely to matter in
cookery and (b) probably less than the variation from one set of
measuring spoons to the next, or from one measurement with the same
set of spoons to the next.

--
"The difference between the /almost right/ word and the /right/ word
is ... the difference between the lightning-bug and the lightning."
--Mark Twain
Stan Brown, Tompkins County, NY, USA http://OakRoadSystems.com

[Stan Brown]

On Fri, 10 Jul 2015 20:50:46 +0100, Adam Funk wrote:
> European recipes (including British, for this purpose) sensibly use
> weight for solids in reasonably weighable quantities, unlike the
> American persistence in things like "1 cup of flour",

Alton Brown (host of the longtime show /Good Eats/) strongly
recommends weighing dry ingredients, and more and more recipes do
seem to give weights, at least in recipes for baked goods. Even
setting aside possible variations in measuring spoons, flour settles.
Cookbooks recommend sifting before measuring, but two people are
unlikely to sift flour to the same density.

[Stan Brown]

On Sat, 11 Jul 2015 17:51:57 +0100, Janet wrote:
> My digital scale is the size of a slim paperback, takes up hardly any
> space in a drawer or cupboard, weighs anything from 5 grams to 11 pounds
> in metric or imperial, dry or fluid weights at the push of a button;
> plus it tares to zero so can measure/weigh IN the mixing bowl or pan,
> over and over again; IOW it measure/weighs each addition to the recipe.
>

And it enables one to get he perfect ratio of gin to vermouth when
making martinis -- whatever one considers to be the perfect ratio.
(For me it's 6 to 1.)

And it doubles as a postal scale, for those rare occasions when one
actually sends mail any more.

I bought this one a year and a half ago, and it's performed
beautifully for me:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B003MSZBSI
As Janet suggested, it fits comfortably in my flat drawer with the
potholders.

I don't understand how one of the available units of measure can be
"fl oz", though: that's volume, not weight.

[Tough Guy no. 1265]

On Fri, 10 Jul 2015 22:26:29 +0100, R H Draney <dado...@spamcop.net> wrote:

> musika <mUs...@NOSPAMexcite.com> wrote in
> news:mnp1sd$77l$1...@dont-email.me:
>
>> On 10/07/2015 18:57, Pierre Jelenc wrote:
>>>
>>> 2tbsp = 30 ml in SI. Nothing mysterious or arcane about it.
>>>

>> Oh, but there is.
>>
>> 1 UK tbsp = 17.7581714ml
>> 1 US tbsp = 14.7867648ml
>

> Those Brits are well-known for their bigger tables, going all the way back
> to King Arthur....r

King Arthur used 7 decimal places?

--
The microwave was invented after a researcher walked by a radar
tube and a chocolate bar melted in his pocket.

[Tough Guy no. 1265]

I will use this as an excuse in future when my cooking is frowned at.

--
Complete with obligatory low frequency bass, electrically recorded on a four track in two hours. This has enough power to destroy the most expensive washing machine.

[Charles Hope]

In article <27e74b0d-6c2e-466e...@googlegroups.com>, Peter

In this case you need a little, but not too much, extra water. The rice
tastes better that way.

[spuorg...@gowanhill.com]

On Saturday, 11 July 2015 13:54:14 UTC+1, Peter T. Daniels wrote:

> You must have some pretty damn big kettles.

It's all the tea we drink, and the 240V electricity to boil them with :-)

Owain

[Richard Tobin]

In article <MPG.300b40139...@news.individual.net>,

Stan Brown <the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>I don't understand how one of the available units of measure can be
>"fl oz", though: that's volume, not weight.

It assumes that the density is roughly that of water.

-- Richard

[Richard Tobin]

In article <27e74b0d-6c2e-466e...@googlegroups.com>,

Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:

>The formula for cooking rice is IIRC equal volumes of water and rice (it may
>be twice the water, I haven't made rice since I've needed to avoid carbs).
>15 ml of water -- 1 T -- wouldn't get you much rice (even if it was some
>sort of pre-cooked stuff).

This is already fully-cooked rice, as in your "TV dinner".

A little liquid water added will produce steam when microwaved and
hopefully result in more uniformly heated and hydrated rice. It helps
when reheating pasta too.

-- Richard

[Mike Barnes]

Stan Brown wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Jul 2015 20:50:46 +0100, Adam Funk wrote:
>> European recipes (including British, for this purpose) sensibly use
>> weight for solids in reasonably weighable quantities, unlike the
>> American persistence in things like "1 cup of flour",
>
> Alton Brown (host of the longtime show /Good Eats/) strongly
> recommends weighing dry ingredients, and more and more recipes do
> seem to give weights, at least in recipes for baked goods. Even
> setting aside possible variations in measuring spoons, flour settles.
> Cookbooks recommend sifting before measuring, but two people are
> unlikely to sift flour to the same density.

I often also weigh liquids, in quantities larger than a few tablespoons.

[Peter T. Daniels]

In TV dinners the rice is a side dish accompanying some sort of meat product
in a gravy of some sort, so the steam from the gravy would suffice for hydrating
the rice. Maybe that's why the rice (and also the noodles) isn't in a separate
compartment the way the mashed potatoes are.

And you're supposed to pierce the plastic-wrap top so it won't explode with the
expanding steam.

The package has to rigorously list components in the order of amount, so they're
often called things like "marinara sauce and meatballs."

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

On Sat, 11 Jul 2015 12:03:18 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"

That 15 ml of water is added to the rice in the pre-cooked frozen
ready-meal. The water is additional to that used in cooking the meal
prior to freezing it in the factory. The instructions I see on those
ready meals that need water added say something like "microwave the
frozen meal for N minutes, add 15 ml water to the rice, microwave for M
minutes".

>But the point of a TV dinner or a frozen entree is that you just stick it in
>the microwave for a few minutes, no adding anything. Some stirring may be needed.

That is the case with many such items, but there are some in which water
needs to be added before or during microwaving.

[Robert Bannister]

Well said, although I didn't realise it was yet another age marker.

The dividing line is somewhere between the end of the war and
> the beginnings of formal metrication in 1965. If you have old,
> practical UK cutlery from before that era (e.g. the near-ubiquitous
> old "fiddle handle" spoons), the above is likely to be true. If you
> have more recently-manufactured measures, the metric quantities
> probably apply. My mother's old post-war cook-book definitely still
> quoted the older relationship.

--
Robert Bannister
Perth, Western Australia

[Robert Bannister]

On 12/07/2015 4:08 am, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Jul 2015 22:26:29 +0100, R H Draney <dado...@spamcop.net>
> wrote:
>
>> musika <mUs...@NOSPAMexcite.com> wrote in
>> news:mnp1sd$77l$1...@dont-email.me:
>>
>>> On 10/07/2015 18:57, Pierre Jelenc wrote:
>>>>
>>>> 2tbsp = 30 ml in SI. Nothing mysterious or arcane about it.
>>>>
>>> Oh, but there is.
>>>
>>> 1 UK tbsp = 17.7581714ml
>>> 1 US tbsp = 14.7867648ml
>>
>> Those Brits are well-known for their bigger tables, going all the way
>> back
>> to King Arthur....r
>
> King Arthur used 7 decimal places?
>

I thought his tables seated 12.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Saturday, July 11, 2015 at 6:12:58 PM UTC-4, PeterWD wrote:
> On Sat, 11 Jul 2015 12:03:18 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
> <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >On Saturday, July 11, 2015 at 9:06:55 AM UTC-4, Charles Hope wrote:
> >> In article <2bd30efc-1225-4b39...@googlegroups.com>, Peter
> >> T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >> > On Saturday, July 11, 2015 at 7:38:37 AM UTC-4, spuorg...@gowanhill.com

> >> > > Teaspoons and tablespoons are adequately precise for many culinary
> >> > > purposes and generally well-understood by the British
> >> > > ready-meal-consuming public.
> >> > What do they have to do with "ready-meals," which I assume are something
> >> > like "TV dinners" or "frozen entrees"? What sort of measuring would you
> >> > need to do to add what sort of ingredient?
> >> Add water to rice. Put in too much and you'd get a soggy result. But,
> >> perhasp you like rice that way.
> >The formula for cooking rice is IIRC equal volumes of water and rice (it may
> >be twice the water, I haven't made rice since I've needed to avoid carbs).
> >15 ml of water -- 1 T -- wouldn't get you much rice (even if it was some
> >sort of pre-cooked stuff).
>
> That 15 ml of water is added to the rice in the pre-cooked frozen
> ready-meal. The water is additional to that used in cooking the meal
> prior to freezing it in the factory. The instructions I see on those
> ready meals that need water added say something like "microwave the
> frozen meal for N minutes, add 15 ml water to the rice, microwave for M
> minutes".
>
> >But the point of a TV dinner or a frozen entree is that you just stick it in
> >the microwave for a few minutes, no adding anything. Some stirring may be needed.
>
> That is the case with many such items, but there are some in which water
> needs to be added before or during microwaving.

I wonder whether they even _tried_ marketing such a thing Over Here. It would
be mercilessly pummeled in the competitors' advertising.

[Peter Moylan]

As the peeling and chopping person in this household, I'm used to
hearing my wife calling out "I need 500 grams of pumpkin". I have no
idea what that would be in cups.

--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia

[Tony Cooper]

Nor would I know what three cups of pumpkin would be in grams.

[Rich Ulrich]

On Sat, 11 Jul 2015 16:01:11 -0400, Stan Brown
<the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote:

>On Sat, 11 Jul 2015 17:51:57 +0100, Janet wrote:
>> My digital scale is the size of a slim paperback, takes up hardly any
>> space in a drawer or cupboard, weighs anything from 5 grams to 11 pounds
>> in metric or imperial, dry or fluid weights at the push of a button;
>> plus it tares to zero so can measure/weigh IN the mixing bowl or pan,
>> over and over again; IOW it measure/weighs each addition to the recipe.
>>
>
>And it enables one to get he perfect ratio of gin to vermouth when
>making martinis -- whatever one considers to be the perfect ratio.
>(For me it's 6 to 1.)
>
>And it doubles as a postal scale, for those rare occasions when one
>actually sends mail any more.
>
>I bought this one a year and a half ago, and it's performed
>beautifully for me:
>http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B003MSZBSI

A couple of years ago, I bought a lovely, small digital scale
through Amazon. There was no good reason except that
it was surprisingly cheap, and I occasionally wonder about
the weight of things like pennies, or whatever. "Cool". I'm
still pleased that I bought it, just to have it.

You know how Amazon "recommends" other products based
on your browsing history and purchases? I very shortly
started being shown all varieties of druggie paraphenalia,
until I remembered to pursue the "do not use this" option
under the button for "Why was this recommended?"

--
Rich Ulrich

[Peter Moylan]

Of course it would depend on how small you made your pieces of pumpkin.
A typical roasting piece might well balance on top of the cup without
falling in.

[Tough Guy no. 1265]

Not everyone in a committee is useful.

--
Women do not snore, burp, sweat, or fart.
Therefore, they must "bitch" or they will blow up.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Sunday, July 12, 2015 at 3:06:51 AM UTC-4, Peter Moylan wrote:
> On 12/07/15 16:04, Tony Cooper wrote:
> > On Sun, 12 Jul 2015 15:28:17 +1000, Peter Moylan
> > <pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:

> >> As the peeling and chopping person in this household, I'm used to
> >> hearing my wife calling out "I need 500 grams of pumpkin". I have no
> >> idea what that would be in cups.

~1 pound (16 oz.), so 2 cups.

> > Nor would I know what three cups of pumpkin would be in grams.

It's mostly water, so ml would seem more apt.

> Of course it would depend on how small you made your pieces of pumpkin.
> A typical roasting piece might well balance on top of the cup without
> falling in.

? What do you use pumpkins for, other than jack o'lanterns and pie?

Or maybe "pumpkin" denotes something quite different Down There?

[Jerry Friedman]

On 7/11/15 10:51 AM, Janet wrote:
> In article <c3i0qa5dm510e7ada...@4ax.com>, tonycooper214
> @gmail.com says...
>>
>> On Fri, 10 Jul 2015 20:50:46 +0100, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com>
>> wrote:

...

>>> European recipes (including British, for this purpose) sensibly use
>>> weight for solids in reasonably weighable quantities, unlike the
>>> American persistence in things like "1 cup of flour",
>>
>> I'm no cook, but I don't see that as being all that more "sensible".
>
> If you were a cook, you'd know it is.
>
>> The few times I want a (unit) of something, it's quite easy to grab a
>> measuring spoon or measuring cup.
>
> So, is that a smoothed-level cup or a heaped one?

...

And was the flour sifted before measuring? How careful were you not to
shake it down?

(I don't do the kind of cooking where such things are important.)

--
Jerry Friedman

[Paul Wolff]

On Sun, 12 Jul 2015, Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid> posted:

About a D, I should think.
--
Paul

[Tony Cooper]

On Sun, 12 Jul 2015 15:03:24 +0100, Paul Wolff
<boun...@two.wolff.co.uk> wrote:

>>
>>As the peeling and chopping person in this household, I'm used to
>>hearing my wife calling out "I need 500 grams of pumpkin". I have no
>>idea what that would be in cups.
>>
>About a D, I should think.

That brought out a snicker.

But, it leads me a somewhat serious question: are cup sizes a
standard of measurement for bras in the UK and in Europe?

It seems that all other measurement and size standards are different
continent-to-continent.

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brassiere_measurement

Bra size labeling systems vary from country to country because
manufacturers have not agreed on international standards.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brassiere_measurement#International_fitting_standards

[Robin Bignall]

There are various versions. One has it at 12 + 1 empty seat (Siege
perilous). Another suggests that Arthur had 225 named knights. The
Winchester Round Table (13th Century) seats 25, if my count is right.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Round_Table
--
Robin Bignall
Herts, England (BrE)

[Peter Moylan]

On 2015-Jul-12 23:03, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> On Sunday, July 12, 2015 at 3:06:51 AM UTC-4, Peter Moylan wrote:
>> On 12/07/15 16:04, Tony Cooper wrote:
>>> On Sun, 12 Jul 2015 15:28:17 +1000, Peter Moylan
>>> <pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
>
>>>> As the peeling and chopping person in this household, I'm used to
>>>> hearing my wife calling out "I need 500 grams of pumpkin". I have no
>>>> idea what that would be in cups.
>
> ~1 pound (16 oz.), so 2 cups.
>
>>> Nor would I know what three cups of pumpkin would be in grams.
>
> It's mostly water, so ml would seem more apt.

Less so than for many other vegetables, I think. But how would anyone do
the measuring if all you had was cups? You'd have to shred it to get it
into a cup. Using kitchen scales works even if you don't chop it into
chunks.

>> Of course it would depend on how small you made your pieces of pumpkin.
>> A typical roasting piece might well balance on top of the cup without
>> falling in.
>
> ? What do you use pumpkins for, other than jack o'lanterns and pie?

Most recently, pumpkin soup. Roast pumpkin is popular, and some people
also like mashed pumpkin.

We don't do jack o'lanterns here. I've tasted pumpkin pie only once or
twice in my life, and found it disgusting.

> Or maybe "pumpkin" denotes something quite different Down There?

I've heard it called "winter squash" in the US.

[occam]

On 10/07/2015 19:30, jcd...@gmail.com wrote:

> On Friday, July 10, 2015 at 9:57:07 AM UTC-7, Harrison Hill wrote:
>> Our Lidl's Balti says "...add 2tbsp [sic] to the rice, stir and re-cover". I don't think I have seen a "tbsp" for 20 years - a bit of my childhood English living on in German packaging. Whatever happened to SI units.
>

> 2 tbsp is standard recipe nomenclature on this side of the pond.
>

Yes, but shouldn't it be '2 tbsps'. I mean, German packaging or not,
plurals are plurals.

[Peter Moylan]

Not when you're dealing with standard units. We write 40 ml, not 40 mls.
The latter would mean 40 millilitre-seconds.

[Bertel Lund Hansen]

Tony Cooper skrev:

> Cooks like my wife would have to make adjustments. She adds a
> teaspoon of something by sight rather than by measurement. She has a
> good enough idea of what a (unit) of salt is without measuring. She'd
> have to re-learn what (x) grams of salt would be.

The same goes for me. And it's not practical to weigh olive oil
on a scale.

--
Bertel, Kolt, Denmark

[Adam Funk]

On 2015-07-11, Robin Bignall wrote:

> On Sat, 11 Jul 2015 09:01:13 +0800, Robert Bannister
><rob...@clubtelco.com> wrote:

>
>>On 11/07/2015 5:26 am, R H Draney wrote:
>>> musika <mUs...@NOSPAMexcite.com> wrote in
>>> news:mnp1sd$77l$1...@dont-email.me:
>>>
>>>> On 10/07/2015 18:57, Pierre Jelenc wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> 2tbsp = 30 ml in SI. Nothing mysterious or arcane about it.
>>>>>
>>>> Oh, but there is.
>>>>
>>>> 1 UK tbsp = 17.7581714ml
>>>> 1 US tbsp = 14.7867648ml
>>>
>>> Those Brits are well-known for their bigger tables, going all the way back
>>> to King Arthur....r
>>>
>>

>>A round of table, a round of bread, a round of golf.
>>
> A round of drinks. Cheers.
>
>>An Australian tablespoonful is apparently 20 mL. I thought it was 25 mL.

I thought 25 ml was "a shot".


--
svn ci -m 'come back make, all is forgiven!' build.xml

[Adam Funk]

On 2015-07-10, Garrett Wollman wrote:

> In article <mnp1sd$77l$1...@dont-email.me>,

> musika <mus...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>>Oh, but there is.
>>
>>1 UK tbsp = 17.7581714ml
>>1 US tbsp = 14.7867648ml
>

> 1 US tbsp (which I would abbreviate "tbl", but anyway) is 1/16 cup,
> and for food labeling purposes, 1 cup is officially, legally defined
> as 240 ml, hence 1 US tbsp = 15 ml (exactly).
>
> The value you give is correct if you use the traditional definition of
> a cup as 8 fluid ounces (half a pint), which is a bit smaller, about
> 236 ml.

I guess that's a small enough difference that it can't mess up a
recipe.


--
Classical Greek lent itself to the promulgation of a rich culture,
indeed, to Western civilization. Computer languages bring us
doorbells that chime with thirty-two tunes, alt.sex.bestiality, and
Tetris clones. (Stoll 1995)

[Adam Funk]

On 2015-07-11, Peter T. Daniels wrote:

> The formula for cooking rice is IIRC equal volumes of water and rice (it may
> be twice the water, I haven't made rice since I've needed to avoid carbs).
> 15 ml of water -- 1 T -- wouldn't get you much rice (even if it was some
> sort of pre-cooked stuff).

I mix 2 volumes of boiling water & 1 volume of rice in a pyrex bowl &
put it in the microwave oven for 10 minutes, then stir & add more time
repeatedly until it's done. This is *so much* easier than cooking
rice over direct heat. (Sorry this isn't much use to you, but maybe
someone else will find it useful.)



--
I was born, lucky me, in a land that I love.
Though I'm poor, I am free.
When I grow I shall fight; for this land I shall die.
May the sun never set. --- The Kinks

[Adam Funk]

On 2015-07-11, Janet wrote:

> In article <c3i0qa5dm510e7ada...@4ax.com>, tonycooper214
> @gmail.com says...

>> A scale is just something else keep
>> out on the counter.

>
> My digital scale is the size of a slim paperback, takes up hardly any
> space in a drawer or cupboard, weighs anything from 5 grams to 11 pounds
> in metric or imperial, dry or fluid weights at the push of a button;
> plus it tares to zero so can measure/weigh IN the mixing bowl or pan,
> over and over again; IOW it measure/weighs each addition to the recipe.

Ours only goes up to 3 kg but otherwise sounds the same. It goes
through one 9 V battery every 5 years or so.


--
If hard data were the filtering criterion you could fit the entire
contents of the Internet on a floppy disk. --- Cecil Adams

[Cheryl]

On 2015-07-13 1:00 AM, Peter Moylan wrote:
> On 2015-Jul-12 23:03, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>> On Sunday, July 12, 2015 at 3:06:51 AM UTC-4, Peter Moylan wrote:
>>> On 12/07/15 16:04, Tony Cooper wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 12 Jul 2015 15:28:17 +1000, Peter Moylan
>>>> <pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>>> As the peeling and chopping person in this household, I'm used to
>>>>> hearing my wife calling out "I need 500 grams of pumpkin". I have no
>>>>> idea what that would be in cups.
>>
>> ~1 pound (16 oz.), so 2 cups.
>>
>>>> Nor would I know what three cups of pumpkin would be in grams.
>>
>> It's mostly water, so ml would seem more apt.
>
> Less so than for many other vegetables, I think. But how would anyone do
> the measuring if all you had was cups? You'd have to shred it to get it
> into a cup. Using kitchen scales works even if you don't chop it into
> chunks.

Although I'm generally of the North American school of thinking in these
matters, that point has occurred to me. I basically chop up bits until I
have the appropriate volume, but for vegetables I cook more often than I
cook pumpkin, I have a fairly good idea of the volume I'll get. Except
for baking, were accurate measurements are more important, volume
measurements do work - and very experienced bakers, like my grandmother,
can bake some things without apparently measuring at all. She used to
say she added things until it looked about right, which didn't work for
me at all!

I do have one of those neat little electronic scales that tares and
everything, but I bought it as a diet aid rather than for routine cooking.


--
Cheryl

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Sunday, July 12, 2015 at 11:30:29 PM UTC-4, Peter Moylan wrote:
> On 2015-Jul-12 23:03, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> > On Sunday, July 12, 2015 at 3:06:51 AM UTC-4, Peter Moylan wrote:
> >> On 12/07/15 16:04, Tony Cooper wrote:
> >>> On Sun, 12 Jul 2015 15:28:17 +1000, Peter Moylan
> >>> <pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >>>> As the peeling and chopping person in this household, I'm used to
> >>>> hearing my wife calling out "I need 500 grams of pumpkin". I have no
> >>>> idea what that would be in cups.
> >
> > ~1 pound (16 oz.), so 2 cups.
> >
> >>> Nor would I know what three cups of pumpkin would be in grams.
> >
> > It's mostly water, so ml would seem more apt.
>
> Less so than for many other vegetables, I think. But how would anyone do
> the measuring if all you had was cups? You'd have to shred it to get it
> into a cup. Using kitchen scales works even if you don't chop it into
> chunks.

So you _are_ talking about something different. Pumpkin innards are mostly
glop, with some filaments attached to the rind.

> >> Of course it would depend on how small you made your pieces of pumpkin.
> >> A typical roasting piece might well balance on top of the cup without
> >> falling in.
> > ? What do you use pumpkins for, other than jack o'lanterns and pie?
>
> Most recently, pumpkin soup. Roast pumpkin is popular, and some people
> also like mashed pumpkin.
>
> We don't do jack o'lanterns here. I've tasted pumpkin pie only once or
> twice in my life, and found it disgusting.
>
> > Or maybe "pumpkin" denotes something quite different Down There?
>
> I've heard it called "winter squash" in the US.

So it's not "proper" American pumpkin.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Monday, July 13, 2015 at 5:45:07 AM UTC-4, Adam Funk wrote:
> On 2015-07-11, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
> > The formula for cooking rice is IIRC equal volumes of water and rice (it may
> > be twice the water, I haven't made rice since I've needed to avoid carbs).
> > 15 ml of water -- 1 T -- wouldn't get you much rice (even if it was some
> > sort of pre-cooked stuff).
>
> I mix 2 volumes of boiling water & 1 volume of rice in a pyrex bowl &
> put it in the microwave oven for 10 minutes, then stir & add more time
> repeatedly until it's done. This is *so much* easier than cooking
> rice over direct heat. (Sorry this isn't much use to you, but maybe
> someone else will find it useful.)

Bizarre. Especially the "keep trying until it's done" part.

You put 2 c of water and 1 c of rice (and a chunk of butter) in a pot
with a tight-fitting lid, turn the heat up high until it just begins to simmer,
turn the heat as low as it will go and put the lid on, and exactly 14 min
later you have perfect fluffy rice.

Since your repeated 10 minuteses are _after_ you've boiled the water,
like most things involving boiling it takes longer in the microwave.

I suspect that traditional way is pretty much how "rice cookers" work, too.

[occam]

On 11/07/2015 21:42, Robin Bignall wrote:
> On Sat, 11 Jul 2015 09:01:13 +0800, Robert Bannister
> <rob...@clubtelco.com> wrote:
>
>> On 11/07/2015 5:26 am, R H Draney wrote:
>>> musika <mUs...@NOSPAMexcite.com> wrote in
>>> news:mnp1sd$77l$1...@dont-email.me:
>>>
>>>> On 10/07/2015 18:57, Pierre Jelenc wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> 2tbsp = 30 ml in SI. Nothing mysterious or arcane about it.
>>>>>

>>>> Oh, but there is.
>>>>
>>>> 1 UK tbsp = 17.7581714ml
>>>> 1 US tbsp = 14.7867648ml
>>>

>>> Those Brits are well-known for their bigger tables, going all the way back
>>> to King Arthur....r
>>>
>>
>> A round of table, a round of bread, a round of golf.
>>
> A round of drinks. Cheers.

A round of applause for the man!

[occam]

Really? Under what circumstances would you interpret '20mls of vinegar'
as 20 millilitre-seconds of vinegar? You really need to ditch those
Heston Blumenthal recipes.

[Charles Hope]

In article <mo08pq$94v$1...@dont-email.me>,

a roundelay?

[Peter Moylan]

In any document that conformed to SI standards.

> You really need to ditch those
> Heston Blumenthal recipes.

Under what circumstance would you find such a measure in a recipe?

OK, a Google search says that some people do write that.
"20 mls of vinegar" 9 results
"20 ml of vinegar" about 166,000 results

While I had Google up I checked to see who Heston Blumenthal was. A
quick sampling of his recipes showed him measuring quantities in g and
ml, not gs and mls.

[Tony Cooper]

On Mon, 13 Jul 2015 10:32:38 +0100, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com>
wrote:

>On 2015-07-11, Janet wrote:
>
>> In article <c3i0qa5dm510e7ada...@4ax.com>, tonycooper214
>> @gmail.com says...
>
>>> A scale is just something else keep
>>> out on the counter.
>>
>> My digital scale is the size of a slim paperback, takes up hardly any
>> space in a drawer or cupboard, weighs anything from 5 grams to 11 pounds
>> in metric or imperial, dry or fluid weights at the push of a button;
>> plus it tares to zero so can measure/weigh IN the mixing bowl or pan,
>> over and over again; IOW it measure/weighs each addition to the recipe.
>
>Ours only goes up to 3 kg but otherwise sounds the same. It goes
>through one 9 V battery every 5 years or so.

I have one like that, but I use it for determining postage.

The measuring spoons and measuring cup can be rinsed off, washed, or
even put through the dishwasher.

Using a scale, I guess you use a container on top of the scale and
then determine the weight of the container to net out the weight of
the foodstuff.

[pensive hamster]

On Monday, 13 July 2015 12:59:33 UTC+1, occam wrote:
> On 13/07/2015 08:43, Peter Moylan wrote:
> > On 2015-Jul-13 16:22, occam wrote:

> >> On 10/07/2015 19:30, jcdill wrote:

> >>> 2 tbsp is standard recipe nomenclature on this side of the pond.
> >>
> >> Yes, but shouldn't it be '2 tbsps'. I mean, German packaging or not,
> >> plurals are plurals.
> >
> > Not when you're dealing with standard units. We write 40 ml, not 40 mls.
> > The latter would mean 40 millilitre-seconds.
> >
>
> Really? Under what circumstances would you interpret '20mls of vinegar'
> as 20 millilitre-seconds of vinegar? You really need to ditch those
> Heston Blumenthal recipes.

I would probably interpret '20mls' as 20 miles.

What would 20 millilitre-seconds be? I guess it's a rate of flow,
roughly a tap (faucet) at close to its minimum flow setting.

[Bertel Lund Hansen]

pensive hamster skrev:

> What would 20 millilitre-seconds be? I guess it's a rate of flow,
> roughly a tap (faucet) at close to its minimum flow setting.

It can't be, because that would be "ml/s". "Nm" is a unit that
can be computed as N * m, so mls = ml * s. I can't imagine where
that would be useful.

In Danish we use an opposite sequence, "sekundmeter", to mean
m/s. That is common in wheather reports and, as a consequence, in
everyday language.

--
Bertel, Kolt, Denmark

[Bertel Lund Hansen]

Tony Cooper skrev:

> Using a scale, I guess you use a container on top of the scale and
> then determine the weight of the container to net out the weight of
> the foodstuff.

That is sooo iceage. My electronic scale starts at 0 no matter
which container is on top when turned on, and it has a button for
0 if you switch container or want to weigh the ingredients in
sequence - a slightly risky business.

--
Bertel, Kolt, Denmark

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

Yes. Some scales have a method of adjustment - "zeroing". You put the
container on the scale and then turn a knob (or something) to set to
zero the weight displayed, then you put what you want to weigh in the
container, and read off the weight without have to do any calculation.

[Tony Cooper]

My scale does not have that feature. It was purchased for use in
weighing things to be mailed, so it doesn't need it.

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

On Mon, 13 Jul 2015 11:11:51 -0400, Tony Cooper

I have a scale for weighing things to be mailed. It is mechanical and
has a zeroing knob. I suspect the knob is provided to allow for slight
variations in manufacture and perhaps to compensate for changes in the
spring, etc, with ambient temperature.

[Garrett Wollman]

In article <b2dc7cx...@news.ducksburg.com>,

Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
>I mix 2 volumes of boiling water & 1 volume of rice in a pyrex bowl &
>put it in the microwave oven for 10 minutes, then stir & add more time
>repeatedly until it's done. This is *so much* easier than cooking
>rice over direct heat.

How is that easier than putting it on a low burner on the stovetop and
checking back 45 minutes later? (I prefer brown rice; 25 minutes for
long-grain white rice.) No stirring, no adding more time, just wait
until the water is gone and it's done.

-GAWollman

--
Garrett A. Wollman | What intellectual phenomenon can be older, or more oft
wol...@bimajority.org| repeated, than the story of a large research program
Opinions not shared by| that impaled itself upon a false central assumption
my employers. | accepted by all practitioners? - S.J. Gould, 1993

[Peter Young]

Well, roundly.

Peter.

--
Peter Young, (BrE, RP), Consultant Anaesthetist, 1975-2004.
(US equivalent: Certified Anesthesiologist) (AUE Os)
Cheltenham and Gloucester, UK. Now happily retired.
http://pnyoung.orpheusweb.co.uk

[Cheryl]

On 2015-07-13 1:33 PM, Garrett Wollman wrote:
> In article <b2dc7cx...@news.ducksburg.com>,
> Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
>> I mix 2 volumes of boiling water & 1 volume of rice in a pyrex bowl &
>> put it in the microwave oven for 10 minutes, then stir & add more time
>> repeatedly until it's done. This is *so much* easier than cooking
>> rice over direct heat.
>
> How is that easier than putting it on a low burner on the stovetop and
> checking back 45 minutes later? (I prefer brown rice; 25 minutes for
> long-grain white rice.) No stirring, no adding more time, just wait
> until the water is gone and it's done.
>
> -GAWollman
>

I can forget almost anything on the stove. It`s easy to figure out the
volumes and times for microwaving whatever type and quantity of rice you
usually use. No checking, no stirring, and the microwave turns itself
off if you forget it.

--
Cheryl

[Peter T. Daniels]

tare

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Monday, July 13, 2015 at 12:03:56 PM UTC-4, Garrett Wollman wrote:
> In article <b2dc7cx...@news.ducksburg.com>,
> Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
> >I mix 2 volumes of boiling water & 1 volume of rice in a pyrex bowl &
> >put it in the microwave oven for 10 minutes, then stir & add more time
> >repeatedly until it's done. This is *so much* easier than cooking
> >rice over direct heat.
>
> How is that easier than putting it on a low burner on the stovetop and
> checking back 45 minutes later? (I prefer brown rice; 25 minutes for
> long-grain white rice.) No stirring, no adding more time, just wait
> until the water is gone and it's done.

If you cover it, it takes 14 minutes. Not 45. I considered making brown rice once
-- according to the instructions it would take much longer.

[Dr Nick]

Is it labelled "tare"? A word that I've only ever met in that context.

[Richard Tobin]

In article <mo0h5q$98f$1...@dont-email.me>,

Bertel Lund Hansen <gade...@lundhansen.dk> wrote:
> so mls = ml * s. I can't imagine where that would be useful.

Room rental in Tokyo?

-- Richard

[Janet]

In article <mnvqrh$sbl$1...@dont-email.me>, gade...@lundhansen.dk says...
>
> Tony Cooper skrev:
>
> > Cooks like my wife would have to make adjustments. She adds a
> > teaspoon of something by sight rather than by measurement. She has a
> > good enough idea of what a (unit) of salt is without measuring. She'd
> > have to re-learn what (x) grams of salt would be.
>
> The same goes for me. And it's not practical to weigh olive oil
> on a scale.

Sure it is; don't forget the container to hold it.

Janet

[Janet]

In article <kbf7qa5f5cf4p28na...@4ax.com>, tonycooper214
@gmail.com says...

No. You set the container (usually the mixing bowl, or the saucepan
you're going to cook it in) on the scale and press the button to zero
the scale again. Now weigh the ingredients in the bowl/pan .

If you have six different ingredienbts to weigh and add, just zero the
scale for each addition.

Janet

[Bertel Lund Hansen]

Dr Nick skrev:

>> That is sooo iceage. My electronic scale starts at 0 no matter
>> which container is on top when turned on, and it has a button for
>> 0 if you switch container or want to weigh the ingredients in
>> sequence - a slightly risky business.

> Is it labelled "tare"? A word that I've only ever met in that context.

Close. The Danish word is "tara" which I learnt in math in
school:

Da. netto + tara = brutto
En. net + tare = gross

--
Bertel, Kolt, Denmark

[Jack Campin]

>>> My electronic scale starts at 0 no matter which container is on
>>> top when turned on, and it has a button for 0 if you switch
>>> container or want to weigh the ingredients in sequence - a
>>> slightly risky business.
>> Is it labelled "tare"? A word that I've only ever met in that context.
> Close. The Danish word is "tara" which I learnt in math in
> school:
> Da. netto + tara = brutto
> En. net + tare = gross

You also find "tare" painted on heavy vehicles like buses, maybe
so the weighbridge operator can tell if you've stashed half a ton
of drugs and illegal immigrants underneath.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
e m a i l : j a c k @ c a m p i n . m e . u k
Jack Campin, 11 Third Street, Newtongrange, Midlothian EH22 4PU, Scotland
mobile 07800 739 557 <http://www.campin.me.uk> Twitter: JackCampin

[Robin Bignall]

For cooking such things as rice, my induction hob has a timer. Put the
rice and water into an induction pan, press a button to provide full
power (it boils in seconds), reset power to simmer, set timer. Hob
sounds a buzzer and switches off when timer reaches zero.
--
Robin Bignall
Herts, England (BrE)

[Adam Funk]

I think the consumer-friendly term is "zero"; mine has 3 buttons:

OFF KG ON
LB ZERO


--
"Gonzo, is that the contract from the devil?"
"No, Kermit, it's worse than that. This is the bill from special
effects."

[Oliver Cromm]

* Tony Cooper:

> On Fri, 10 Jul 2015 20:50:46 +0100, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com>
> wrote:

>
>>On 2015-07-10, Harrison Hill wrote:
>>
>>> Our Lidl's Balti says "...add 2tbsp [sic] to the rice, stir and
>>> re-cover". I don't think I have seen a "tbsp" for 20 years - a bit
>>> of my childhood English living on in German packaging. Whatever
>>> happened to SI units.
>>

>>European recipes (including British, for this purpose) sensibly use
>>weight for solids in reasonably weighable quantities, unlike the
>>American persistence in things like "1 cup of flour",
>
> I'm no cook, but I don't see that as being all that more "sensible".
> The few times I want a (unit) of something, it's quite easy to grab a
> measuring spoon or measuring cup. A scale is just something else keep
> out on the counter.

Weighing is more reliable. I recently read several articles - in
English! - about the correct way of making coffee, and at least
two of them insisted on weighing the coffee powder.

A set of measuring cups/spoons is just one more thing to keep in
the drawer, in Germany I didn't have one (our scale stays in the
cabinet most of the time).

> Cooks like my wife would have to make adjustments. She adds a
> teaspoon of something by sight rather than by measurement. She has a
> good enough idea of what a (unit) of salt is without measuring. She'd
> have to re-learn what (x) grams of salt would be.

That's a problem with changing the system, regardless of the
direction of the change.

--
Failover worked - the system failed, then it was over.
(freely translated from a remark by Dietz Proepper
in de.alt.sysadmin.recovery)

[Oliver Cromm]

* Peter Moylan:

> On 11/07/15 04:12, musika wrote:
>> On 10/07/2015 18:57, Pierre Jelenc wrote:

>>> In article <947840a7-fbca-438e...@googlegroups.com>,

>>> Harrison Hill <harrison...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Our Lidl's Balti says "...add 2tbsp [sic] to the rice, stir and
>>>> re-cover". I don't think I have seen a "tbsp" for 20 years - a bit of my
>>>> childhood English living on in German packaging. Whatever happened to SI
>>>> units.
>>>

>>> 2tbsp = 30 ml in SI. Nothing mysterious or arcane about it.
>>>
>> Oh, but there is.
>>
>> 1 UK tbsp = 17.7581714ml
>> 1 US tbsp = 14.7867648ml
>

> An Australian tablespoon is a bit bigger than that, I think. But in any
> case what Harrison needs to know is the size of a German tablespoon,
> which is probably different yet again.

AFAIK, there is no standard for that in Germany, it's an informal
measurement.

--
XML combines all the inefficiency of text-based formats with most
of the unreadability of binary formats.
Oren Tirosh, comp.lang.python

[Garrett Wollman]

In article <ktkd7cx...@news.ducksburg.com>,

Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
>On 2015-07-13, Dr Nick wrote:
>> Is it labelled "tare"? A word that I've only ever met in that context.
>
>I think the consumer-friendly term is "zero"; mine has 3 buttons:
>
> OFF KG ON
> LB ZERO

On mine, they are labeled "Units", "Zero", and "[international symbol
for on/off toggle]". (It's the 10-kg Oxo that Cook's Illustrated
recommended, although for US sales they have labeled it as "22 pounds"
capacity instead of "10 kg".)

[Tony Cooper]

On Mon, 13 Jul 2015 17:33:59 -0400, Oliver Cromm
<lispa...@crommatograph.info> wrote:

>* Tony Cooper:
>
>> On Fri, 10 Jul 2015 20:50:46 +0100, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>On 2015-07-10, Harrison Hill wrote:
>>>
>>>> Our Lidl's Balti says "...add 2tbsp [sic] to the rice, stir and
>>>> re-cover". I don't think I have seen a "tbsp" for 20 years - a bit
>>>> of my childhood English living on in German packaging. Whatever
>>>> happened to SI units.
>>>
>>>European recipes (including British, for this purpose) sensibly use
>>>weight for solids in reasonably weighable quantities, unlike the
>>>American persistence in things like "1 cup of flour",
>>
>> I'm no cook, but I don't see that as being all that more "sensible".
>> The few times I want a (unit) of something, it's quite easy to grab a
>> measuring spoon or measuring cup. A scale is just something else keep
>> out on the counter.
>
>Weighing is more reliable. I recently read several articles - in
>English! - about the correct way of making coffee, and at least
>two of them insisted on weighing the coffee powder.

While I am not the cook of the house, I am the person who makes the
coffee. Well, I add coffee and water to our Zojirushi coffee maker at
night and whoever's first up in the morning presses the button to
start the process.

The machine came with a tiny scoop, and I put six scoops of coffee in
the filter basket. I make no effort at precision. Some scoops may be
slightly over-filled and some might be slightly under-filled. This is
a result of trial-and-error in trying different numbers of scoops.

My palate is not so sensitive that I can detect under- or over-filled
scooping. My wife has no complaints, either.

I think you have to be OCD to feel the coffee needs to be weighed.
If a scale is used, a bit over or a bit under the desired weight
wouldn't make any difference in the taste.


Should that be "whomever's"?

[R H Draney]

Bertel Lund Hansen <gade...@lundhansen.dk> wrote in news:mo0h5q$98f$1
@dont-email.me:

> In Danish we use an opposite sequence, "sekundmeter", to mean
> m/s. That is common in wheather reports and, as a consequence, in
> everyday language.

That's about the worst spell of weather we've had in some time....r