"Miracle Thaw" defroster, for real ??
chp
something like that, which promises to fully defrost your frozen meats
in a matter of 10 to 20 minutes. It doesn't need to plugged in, so
the heat it uses to defrost the meat must come from the air (as
opposed to some sort of heating coil). Does anyone know whether this
product really works, and if so, how does it work? What material is
it made of? It seems to me (a non-scientist, non-engineer, but with a
great curiosity for both fields) that the material must transfer a
great deal of heat energy from the air into the frozen meat. Any
answers would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Chip Pearson
Phil Coombes
was reviewed in Which? magazine here in the UK. Which? is the magazine
of the UK Consumers Association and surprisingly enough they gave this
the moniker of the "gadget that actually works". I think they said that
it is just a better implementation of simply putting your meat on a
metal tray, which because of the high conductivity and large surface
area manages to accelerate defrosting by quite a bit. I think this
gadget just is formed to make better contact with the meat and is also
rippled to increase surface area, or something like that. Anyhow, I've
seen it in the shops here. Which?'s final conclusion was along the
lines of 'yes it works, but you'd still be better off thinking about
your supper a bit sooner anyway, and getting your food out earlier'
Of course this may not be the gadget at all, in which case I am talking
directly out of my arse!
Cheers,
Phil
--
============================================================================
>>>>>>>>>>>> Philip Coombes, Aethos Communications Systems Ltd. <<<<<<<<<<<<
>>>>>>>>>>>> 220 Park Avenue, Aztec West, Bristol, BS12 4SB. UK <<<<<<<<<<<<
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tel. +44 (0)1454 614455 Fax. +44 (0)1454 620527 <<<<<<<<<<<<<
============================================================================
-------------------- Broaden Your Mind - Iron Your Head --------------------
============================================================================
James McIninch
: I've seen TV commercials for a product called "Miracle Thaw", or
: something like that, which promises to fully defrost your frozen meats
: in a matter of 10 to 20 minutes. It doesn't need to plugged in, so
: the heat it uses to defrost the meat must come from the air (as
: opposed to some sort of heating coil). Does anyone know whether this
: product really works, and if so, how does it work? What material is
: it made of? It seems to me (a non-scientist, non-engineer, but with a
: great curiosity for both fields) that the material must transfer a
: great deal of heat energy from the air into the frozen meat. Any
: answers would be greatly appreciated.
It seems to me that a properly shaped piece of aluminum or other material
with high thermal conductivity would work. In much the same way a heat sink
works to keep electronics components cool, they can be used to warm up cooler
objects. The idea would be to maximize the contact area with the cold surface
while maximizing the ratio of suface area to volume of the material not
touching the colder object. You could speed up the process by making sure warm
dry air flowed across the surface.
I have no idea what the "Miracle Thaw" thing is, but the idea is plausible.
I'd question the practice of placing meat out on the counter for prolonged
periods of time, however. That's just not too bright.
Mac Almy
On Tue, 23 Apr 1996, chp wrote:
[snip]
> It seems to me (a non-scientist, non-engineer, but with a
> great curiosity for both fields) that the material must transfer a
> great deal of heat energy from the air into the frozen meat.
[snip]
>
> Thanks,
> Chip Pearson
>
>
>
You're right on the money. I guess if we really want to quibble
we could say that it transfers heat energy more efficiently, but why
bother. Miracle Thaw works because (ta da!) it's made of metal. Metal
conducts heat very well, while your wood or formica counter top doesn't.
Aluminum conducts heat over a thousand times faster than wood.
So if you set your pork chops down on your wooden counter, you
make the counter right underneath very cold and the rest of it stays at
room temperature, more or less. If you put them down on metal, the metal
gets slightly cooler than room temperature, but has a pretty uniform
temperature. So the surface the meat is in contact with generally just
stays hotter with metal than with wood.
The one I've seen in stores has troughs carved in it to collect
water run off. The advantages of this are a) it is less messy than just
setting your meat down on a metal counter and b) your dinner doesn't end
up sitting in a pool of cold water (also a poor thermal conductor).
However, I think you could save your money and get the same results by
setting a large, thick-walled, aluminum stock pot upside-down in the sink
and putting your meat on top of it.
So how come when I'M thawing dinner, I never remember to take the
meat out of the styrofoam?
Mac Almy
howard kennett
> >I've seen TV commercials for a product called "Miracle Thaw", or
> >something like that, which promises to fully defrost your frozen meats
> >in a matter of 10 to 20 minutes. It doesn't need to plugged in, so
> >the heat it uses to defrost the meat must come from the air (as
> >opposed to some sort of heating coil). Does anyone know whether this
> >product really works, and if so, how does it work? What material is
> >great curiosity for both fields) that the material must transfer a
> >answers would be greatly appreciated.
> >
> >Chip Pearson
> >Hi Chip, et all,
I bought one of them and would recommend it as useful but no miracle.
It's a heavy metal plate on stubby little feet. The surface is slightly
grooved and feels rather like teflon. The heat is provided by your very
own hot water. Before and several times during the thaw period you are
required to rinse the plate under the hottest water you can muster. the
process is rather a pain and IMHO does not produce an end product that
is noticeably better than a slow thaw. Also, the plate is only about 12"
by 6" (an estimate, I don't have it here with me at work) so you can't
do much food at one time. It works well only for flat pieces. It is as
fast as they say but you have to be there rinsing and turning the entire
time. The thing I like least about it is that I will always have to
reread the directions for use (and be able to find them!!) since times,
etc. vary with the size of the object begin thawed.
Howard
hken...@mit.edu
Karen L Lingel
In article <4lhnkq$a...@news.mixcom.com>, ch...@mixcom.com (chp) writes:
>I've seen TV commercials for a product called "Miracle Thaw", or
product really works, and if so, how does it work?
Consumer Reports says that, yeah, it works, but save yourself the
$29.95 and just use a heavy skillet, which works just as well, and you
probably already have one.
It works because metal conducts the "coldness" out of the meat faster
than air does. Needless to say, heavy skillet metal works as good as
"Miracle Thaw" metal.
As a bonus recommendation: You can achieve the effects of
"Silver Lightning" by using regular old aluminum foil (plus the
baking soda and boiling water.)
-k-
--------------------------------------
Karen Lingel, Physicist and Penguinist
Glenn Channell
>On Tue, 23 Apr 1996, chp wrote:
>[snip]
>> It seems to me (a non-scientist, non-engineer, but with a
>> great curiosity for both fields) that the material must transfer a
>> great deal of heat energy from the air into the frozen meat.
>[snip]
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Chip Pearson
>>
>>
>>
> You're right on the money. I guess if we really want to quibble
>we could say that it transfers heat energy more efficiently, but why
>bother. Miracle Thaw works because (ta da!) it's made of metal. Metal
>conducts heat very well, while your wood or formica counter top doesn't.
>Aluminum conducts heat over a thousand times faster than wood.
> So if you set your pork chops down on your wooden counter, you
>make the counter right underneath very cold and the rest of it stays at
>room temperature, more or less. If you put them down on metal, the metal
>gets slightly cooler than room temperature, but has a pretty uniform
>temperature. So the surface the meat is in contact with generally just
>stays hotter with metal than with wood.
> The one I've seen in stores has troughs carved in it to collect
>water run off. The advantages of this are a) it is less messy than just
>setting your meat down on a metal counter and b) your dinner doesn't end
>up sitting in a pool of cold water (also a poor thermal conductor).
>However, I think you could save your money and get the same results by
>setting a large, thick-walled, aluminum stock pot upside-down in the sink
>and putting your meat on top of it.
The only improvement the Miracle Thaw people came up with over a piece of
Aluminum or Copper or Steel or whatever (besides the grooves for the liquid)
is the fact that the Miracle Thaw is coated with some black substance
possibly teflon, I dunno), so the heat transfer rate is increased somewhat
due to radiative heat transfer. I'm not sure how significant this is (I
could probably do the calc's, but I'm lazy), but it most likely DOES increase
the speed marginally if kept in direct light. I doubt that it makes a
large difference however.
Glenn Channell
Michael Edelman
: chp (ch...@mixcom.com) wrote:
: : I've seen TV commercials for a product called "Miracle Thaw", or
: : something like that, which promises to fully defrost your frozen meats
: : in a matter of 10 to 20 minutes.
: It seems to me that a properly shaped piece of aluminum or other material
: with high thermal conductivity would work.
We've hashed this one to death before.
1. Yes, it's just a piece of aluminum. You're supposed to heat it under
the tap and then lay food on it.
2. It's faster to put the frozen food in a plastic bag and immerse it
in lukewarm water. Cheaper, too.
--mike
Jerry Bryson
(Phil Coombes) wrote:
> I'm not entirely sure, but I suspect that this is the same product that
> was reviewed in Which? magazine here in the UK. Which? is the magazine
> of the UK Consumers Association and surprisingly enough they gave this
> the moniker of the "gadget that actually works". I think they said that
> it is just a better implementation of simply putting your meat on a
> metal tray, which because of the high conductivity and large surface
> area manages to accelerate defrosting by quite a bit.
high thermal mass, high surface contact. works the same way as the mable
slabs in morgues, is my guess....
Mike Schneider
<Pine.ULT.3.91.960423...@wisp4.physics.wisc.edu>, Mac
Almy <al...@wisp4.physics.wisc.edu> wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Apr 1996, chp wrote:
>
> [snip]
> > It seems to me (a non-scientist, non-engineer, but with a
> > great curiosity for both fields) that the material must transfer a
> > great deal of heat energy from the air into the frozen meat.
> [snip]
> The one I've seen in stores has troughs carved in it to collect
> water run off. The advantages of this are a) it is less messy than just
> setting your meat down on a metal counter and b) your dinner doesn't end
> up sitting in a pool of cold water (also a poor thermal conductor).
> However, I think you could save your money and get the same results by
> setting a large, thick-walled, aluminum stock pot upside-down in the sink
> and putting your meat on top of it.
>
I've tried this, and it actually works better than miracle thaw. More
metal I suspect.
My mother has one and she complained that the food product to be thawed
needed to be flat on the plate.
Like some other posts have suggested you could design your own that would
probably work better and would save you the $15 - $30. Or just use a big
aluminum pan or cookie sheet.
Keep your stick on the ice,
Mike Schneider http://www.bae.umn.edu/Staff/schneider.html
Jeanne Petrangelo
>
>I've seen TV commercials for a product called "Miracle Thaw", or
>something like that, which promises to fully defrost your frozen meats
>the heat it uses to defrost the meat must come from the air (as
>opposed to some sort of heating coil). Does anyone know whether this
>product really works, and if so, how does it work? What material is
>great curiosity for both fields) that the material must transfer a
>answers would be greatly appreciated.
I admit it... my husband and I bought one of these things. It was a
great price at Spag's (if you haven't heard of Spag's, I won't bother
explaining).
First of all, while it does greatly speed up the defrosting process, it
takes longer than 10-20 minutes to fully defrost. It depends on the
meat. A frozen hot dog would probably take only 10 minutes or maybe even
less, but two chicken boneless, skinless chicken breasts take over 30
minutes.
The rest of what you said is right. The tray is made of some kind of
material that conducts temperature incredibly well. If you put an ice
cube on one side, the other side will feel ice-cold within 5 seconds
(Hey, we're engineers; we have to experiment!) The tray is also really
thin, and stands on little feet, so air can circulate underneath.
We found that you can get the tray to work better if you prop it up
higher so air gets underneath better, and if you can get some kind of
draft to circulate under the tray... maybe it would take only 20 minutes
for two chicken breasts to fully thaw. Just make sure you sit the tray
where meat drippings don't matter. My husband likes to set it up
slanted, with the high side sitting on a cast iron skillet (just because
they conduct temperature too... I don't think it really makes a
difference), and the other side resting in a plate with a paper towel --
especially if the meat is chicken.
On the whole, these defrosting trays don't work quite as well as they
claim, but they do greatly speed up the defrosting process. That's good
if you don't trust the microwave to do the defrosting, plus when the meat
is left out for a shorter time, there's less of a chance for something
questionable to happen to it.
It's good for us because we don't always think of switching the meat from
the freezer to the fridge before going to work, and my husband doesn't
like defrosting meat in the microwave (although it's a good 1000 Watt
one).
Also, they're flat, so they don't take up much space to store. If you
can get one for less than $10, I'd say it's worth it.
Hope this helps,
Jeanne
Chris Harris
(Phil Coombes) writes:
> I'm not entirely sure, but I suspect that this is the same product that
> was reviewed in Which? magazine here in the UK. Which? is the magazine
> of the UK Consumers Association and surprisingly enough they gave this
> the moniker of the "gadget that actually works".
Well, the one in "Which" magazine was called "D-Frost", but it sounds
like a pretty close cousin. A cheesecake placed on it was ready to
eat in 56 minutes but one placed on a Pyrex dish wasn't ready after
90 minutes.
The Which? headline was "Gadget that works shock" which is what I was
in after finding something that does what it's supposed to do...
--
* Chr...@head1st.demon.co.uk *
* Chris Harris Chapman Stick # 937 *
* Live & direct from the Cotswolds, oo arr... *
CBT, games, pictures and midi files at http://www.cbl.co.uk)
Dave/Kristin Hall
: > In article <4lhnkq$a...@news.mixcom.com>, chp <ch...@mixcom.com> wrote:
: > >I've seen TV commercials for a product called "Miracle Thaw", or
: I bought one of them and would recommend it as useful but no miracle.
: It's a heavy metal plate on stubby little feet. The surface is slightly
: grooved and feels rather like teflon. The heat is provided by your very
: own hot water. Before and several times during the thaw period you are
: required to rinse the plate under the hottest water you can muster. the
: process is rather a pain and IMHO does not produce an end product that
: is noticeably better than a slow thaw. Also, the plate is only about 12"
: by 6" (an estimate, I don't have it here with me at work) so you can't
: do much food at one time. It works well only for flat pieces. It is as
: fast as they say but you have to be there rinsing and turning the entire
: time. The thing I like least about it is that I will always have to
: reread the directions for use (and be able to find them!!) since times,
: etc. vary with the size of the object begin thawed.
Suggestion (IE, what I use at home):
Rather than going out and buying an over-priced hunk of metal that
is too small to work very well, you might want to wander over to your
friendly neighborhood scrap metal dealer. I ended up with a (roughly)
two foot square by one inch thick slab of aluminum. It works great.
It's large enough for four large T-bone steaks, doesn't require repeated
heating (although I do run it under warm water to start), and cost me
<going-rate-for-scrap-aluminum>+$5. Obviously, YMMV.
Oh, and be sure to clean it *WELL* before using it.
-Dave "I refuse to pay overly-inflated prices for a chunk of metal" Hall
--
David Hall | Kristin Hall
Propulsion Performance Office | no real job as yet...
Naval Air Warfare Ctr, Weapons Div | we live in B.F.E.
----------------------------------------------------------------
"Look, you two post funny posts, but, Jesus Christ, have some
self respect. This had to be one of the sickest posts I've
read on alt.tasteless!" -Damon Chetson
Jeffrey J. Weimer
(Glenn Channell) wrote:
>...
>The only improvement the Miracle Thaw people came up with over a piece of
>Aluminum or Copper or Steel or whatever (besides the grooves for the liquid)
>is the fact that the Miracle Thaw is coated with some black substance
>possibly teflon, I dunno), so the heat transfer rate is increased somewhat
>due to radiative heat transfer. I'm not sure how significant this is (I
>..
Radiation transfer goes as T^4. At room temperatures for the device your
talking about when the two objects are in direct contact, the rate of
radiative transfer is insignificant (read: zero) compared to conduction.
-- jjw
Michael Edelman
: I admit it... my husband and I bought one of these things. It was a
: great price at Spag's (if you haven't heard of Spag's, I won't bother
: explaining).
[snip]
: The rest of what you said is right. The tray is made of some kind of
: material that conducts temperature incredibly well.
It's a space-age material developed for secret defense projects. It's
called 'aluminum'. The secret stealth coating is called 'paint'.
[snip]
: Also, they're flat, so they don't take up much space to store. If you
: can get one for less than $10, I'd say it's worth it.
Unless you have an iron skillet, or go to a scrap dealer and get a slab of
aluminum that size for 50 cents, or just put the food in a plastic
bag, immerse it in lukewarm water and thaw it about 5x as fast.
--mike
Mimi Hiller
> Rather than going out and buying an over-priced hunk of metal that
> is too small to work very well, you might want to wander over to your
> friendly neighborhood scrap metal dealer. I ended up with a (roughly)
> two foot square by one inch thick slab of aluminum. It works great.
> It's large enough for four large T-bone steaks, doesn't require repeated
> heating (although I do run it under warm water to start), and cost me
> <going-rate-for-scrap-aluminum>+$5. Obviously, YMMV.
> Oh, and be sure to clean it *WELL* before using it.
> -Dave "I refuse to pay overly-inflated prices for a chunk of metal" Hall
I decided a long time ago to reconsider single use items in my kitchen when
multi-use ones do just as well in many cases. I will never give up my
easy-grip vegetable peeler or that stupid little tube of a garlic peeler,
but I would never buy a Miracle Thaw or any of its look-alikes...or even a
piece of scrap metal.
I have two wonderful aluminum cookie sheets that I prop up on the counter
slightly and the stuff thaws out quick as a wink on those.
--
Mimi Hiller (mi...@cyber-kitchen.com) Mimi's Cyber Kitchen has a new home!
http://www.cyber-kitchen.com/ is rated 4 stars in NetGuide (4/96). Over
1,500 links, my personal collection of recipes, and a new format...the
most comprehensive food-related site on the www!
Val Eckertson
I bought one of these, took it back, It didn't work. Got a different
brand as a Christmas gift, took that on back too. I have a tile
countertop and someone suggested it might interfere with the heat
transfer of the tray. The tile did feel colder than usual under the
tray, so I used it on a wooden surface. It still didn't work as
advertised. I'll go back and use my microware to defrost.
May
Bill Welch
<k...@lns598.lns.cornell.edu> writes
>As a bonus recommendation: You can achieve the effects of
>"Silver Lightning" by using regular old aluminum foil (plus the
>baking soda and boiling water.)
I was using aluminium milk bottle tops, washing soda and hot water 30
years ago. So it works with baking soda too, does it?
--
Hard-boiled tramp exposes Bill Welch's wrathfully-handled haircut!
rber...@btg.com
Petrangelo) wrote:
>
> I admit it... my husband and I bought one of these things. It was a
> great price at Spag's (if you haven't heard of Spag's, I won't bother
> explaining).
I laughed when I read your post because my husband's from Boston and he
said the same thing to me about Spag's - if you don't know, I can't
explain. Guess us Rhody's missed out!
:)
lalibe...@ccsua.ctstateu.edu
>
> I decided a long time ago to reconsider single use items in my kitchen when
> multi-use ones do just as well in many cases. I will never give up my
> easy-grip vegetable peeler or that stupid little tube of a garlic peeler,
> but I would never buy a Miracle Thaw or any of its look-alikes...or even a
> piece of scrap metal.
>
> I have two wonderful aluminum cookie sheets that I prop up on the counter
> slightly and the stuff thaws out quick as a wink on those.
>
> --
> Mimi Hiller (mi...@cyber-kitchen.com) Mimi's Cyber Kitchen has a new home!
> http://www.cyber-kitchen.com/ is rated 4 stars in NetGuide (4/96). Over
> 1,500 links, my personal collection of recipes, and a new format...the
> most comprehensive food-related site on the www!
I can't believe no one has metioned this yet so I will. When you buy meat you
get a bonus of free bacteria. The bacteria do not grow well at cold
temperatures and die at high (cooking) temperatures. However, they reproduce
quite nicely at room temperature. To thaw meat, you should let it start
thawing on the counter (to the point where it is cold but not frozen like a
rock) and then finish thawing it in the refridgerator and cook it soon after it
finishes thawing. Lack of planning is no excuse for bad health practices.
John Laliberte
lalibe...@ccsu.ctstateu.edu
Andrew C. Plotkin
> >As a bonus recommendation: You can achieve the effects of
> >"Silver Lightning" by using regular old aluminum foil (plus the
> >baking soda and boiling water.)
>
> I was using aluminium milk bottle tops, washing soda and hot water 30
> years ago. So it works with baking soda too, does it?
"Baking soda" is American for sodium bicarbonate. Is washing soda the
same thing?
--Z
"And Aholibamah bare Jeush, and Jaalam, and Korah: these were the borogoves..."
Jeanne Petrangelo
In article <4llebn$j...@cwis-20.wayne.edu>, m...@pookie.pass.wayne.edu
says...
>
>Jeanne Petrangelo (pe...@dizzy.wpi.edu) wrote:
[snip]
>
>: Also, they're flat, so they don't take up much space to store. If you
>: can get one for less than $10, I'd say it's worth it.
>
>Unless you have an iron skillet, or go to a scrap dealer and get a slab
of
>aluminum that size for 50 cents, or just put the food in a plastic
>bag, immerse it in lukewarm water and thaw it about 5x as fast.
I just want to point out that we tried using an iron skillet the same
way, and it didn't work nearly as well. But I like your idea of
immersion in water: I'll have to remember that when we move into a place
with a dishwasher and the sink doesn't magically fill up any more.
Jeanne
danny burstein
(attributions lost. sorry)
>: I admit it... my husband and I bought one of these things. It was a
>: great price at Spag's (if you haven't heard of Spag's, I won't bother
>: explaining).
>[snip]
>: The rest of what you said is right. The tray is made of some kind of
>: material that conducts temperature incredibly well.
>It's a space-age material developed for secret defense projects. It's
>called 'aluminum'. The secret stealth coating is called 'paint'.
>[snip]
>: Also, they're flat, so they don't take up much space to store. If you
>: can get one for less than $10, I'd say it's worth it.
>Unless you have an iron skillet, or go to a scrap dealer and get a slab of
>aluminum that size for 50 cents, or just put the food in a plastic
>bag, immerse it in lukewarm water and thaw it about 5x as fast.
Even better yet, get a metalic material that is both massive and
thermally conductive. Oh, and cheap.
Hmm, depleted uranium would fill the bill perfectly. And, even better,
it's a heat producer of its own!
I understand the Iraqis are complaining about the ?hundreds of tons? of
it that the Allied forces left behind. So we can, so to speak, kill two
birds with one stone:
Get a big telemarketing corporation to finance recovery of this material
from the Iraqi desert. That will both give the Iraqis much needed hard
currency, and also encourage a cleanup of their environment.
I can just see that advertisement now:
"Miracle spage age material developed by the Defense Department.
Original cost, $5,000/pound. But thanks to our special deal, you can get
your very own, mil-spec grade, food warmer for the incredible price of
$19.95. No $600 toilet seats here!"
testimonials: "They sure were hot" (unnamed military sergeant)
"We ate our MREs by them" (GI jane)
"Whenever it got cold, we stuck a dozen of them together
and kept warm" (George Fermi)
"Warning: not for use by children or women of child-bearing years. Do not
stack more than fifty together. Do not use for illumination"
--
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
dan...@panix.com
PET
> Does anyone know whether this
>
I have a friend who purchased one of these. As I recall, it's
just aluminum. Also, I think the box equated the thawing time to
an equal number of minutes thawing in water.
--
[Standard Disclaimer: I only speak for myself.]
Superdave the Wonderchemist
Jeffrey J. Weimer (jjwe...@hiWAAY.net) wrote:
: In article <4lj4o9$b...@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu>, chan...@aries.scs.uiuc.edu
: (Glenn Channell) wrote:
: -- jjw
Unless you live in Tucson, and you are doing the thawing outdoors in the
summer:-)
However, that is a silly thing to do, since your neighbor's dog will just
come up and eat it anyway.
-Superdave The Wonderchemist
Superdave the Wonderchemist
danny burstein (dan...@panix.com) wrote:
: (attributions lost. sorry)
: >: I admit it... my husband and I bought one of these things. It was a
: >: great price at Spag's (if you haven't heard of Spag's, I won't bother
: >: explaining).
: >[snip]
: >: The rest of what you said is right. The tray is made of some kind of
: >: material that conducts temperature incredibly well.
: >It's a space-age material developed for secret defense projects. It's
: >called 'aluminum'. The secret stealth coating is called 'paint'.
: >[snip]
: >: Also, they're flat, so they don't take up much space to store. If you
: >: can get one for less than $10, I'd say it's worth it.
: >Unless you have an iron skillet, or go to a scrap dealer and get a slab of
: >aluminum that size for 50 cents, or just put the food in a plastic
: >bag, immerse it in lukewarm water and thaw it about 5x as fast.
: Even better yet, get a metalic material that is both massive and
: thermally conductive. Oh, and cheap.
: Hmm, depleted uranium would fill the bill perfectly. And, even better,
: it's a heat producer of its own!
Unfortunately, after 4.5 billion years, half of it will be eventually
turned to Lead 206 (if my memory serves me right)
Of course the gamma radiation (emmitted in many of the decay processes)
may kill the bacteria (or cause it to mutate into an incurable disease
that wipes out all other life on the planet).
: I understand the Iraqis are complaining about the ?hundreds of tons? of
: it that the Allied forces left behind. So we can, so to speak, kill two
: birds with one stone:
: Get a big telemarketing corporation to finance recovery of this material
: from the Iraqi desert. That will both give the Iraqis much needed hard
: currency, and also encourage a cleanup of their environment.
: I can just see that advertisement now:
: "Miracle spage age material developed by the Defense Department.
: Original cost, $5,000/pound. But thanks to our special deal, you can get
: your very own, mil-spec grade, food warmer for the incredible price of
: $19.95. No $600 toilet seats here!"
: testimonials: "They sure were hot" (unnamed military sergeant)
: "We ate our MREs by them" (GI jane)
: "Whenever it got cold, we stuck a dozen of them together
: and kept warm" (George Fermi)
:
: "Warning: not for use by children or women of child-bearing years. Do not
: stack more than fifty together. Do not use for illumination"
: --
: _____________________________________________________
: Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
: dan...@panix.com
If communication is the key, then where's the lock?
-Superdave The Wonderchemist
Superdave the Wonderchemist
Mathew Hendry (m.he...@dial.pipex.com) wrote:
: danny burstein (dan...@panix.com) wrote:
: [aluminium "magic defrosting thingies"]
: : Even better yet, get a metalic material that is both massive and
: : thermally conductive. Oh, and cheap.
: :
: : Hmm, depleted uranium would fill the bill perfectly. And, even better,
: : it's a heat producer of its own!
: How does that work? _Depleted_ Uranium is of course non-radioactive.
: I believe that there are treaties which enforce the use of depleted Uranium
: for armour-piercing rounds, because active Uranium is considered tooo nasty
: for use in killing tank crews...
: -- Mat.
Natural Uranium is 99.2745% U-238, and .720% U-235 and will not go to
critical (for nuclear power generation) or supercritical (for a nuclear
explosion) under reasonable conditioins (although I did hear something
about a new type of nuclear power plant which can use natural uranium).
Enriched uranium is about 3% U-235, weapons grade is, I believe near 30%
U-235. Depleted Uranium is the uranium left over after most of the U-235
is taken out eiether by huge mass-spectrometers (the old way) or by gas
diffusion (the new way, it's complicated).
What to do with all this left-over (depleated) uranium? Well, it is very
dense, so let's make bullets out of it.
Depleated uranium is radioactive. U-235 has a half-life of 7.04x10^8
years, while U-238's half-life is 4.46x10^9 years. So, although it is
radioactive, the activity of enriched, weapons grade, natural, and
depleated uranium is quite low.
Source: _CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 70th Edition_, 1989-1990,
CRC Press, Inc. Boca Raton, Florida
(you can find it in any university chemistry or physics department)
-Superdave The Wonderchemist
Mike Schetterer
In article <4lqke3$o...@panix.com>, dan...@panix.com says...
>>Unless you have an iron skillet, or go to a scrap dealer and get a slab of
>>aluminum that size for 50 cents, or just put the food in a plastic
>>bag, immerse it in lukewarm water and thaw it about 5x as fast.
>
>Even better yet, get a metalic material that is both massive and
>thermally conductive. Oh, and cheap. Hmm, depleted uranium would fill the
>bill perfectly. And, even better, it's a heat producer of its own!
Actually, depleted uranium is "cool," in the radioactive sense. The fact
that it is "depleted" means that the more radioactive isotopes have been
removed, and what's left over is relatively safe. The only way to bring
harm to someone with depleted uranium is to hit them over the head with it,
or make them injest it. Most of the radiation released by U-238 is of a
form called "alpha," which can be blocked by the thinnest of materials, like
clothing or even the uppermost layer of dead cells on your skin. However,
if you eat some of it, the first cells sruck by the alpha particles are
viable internal organ cells, which can be killed (best case) or mutated into
a cancerous form (worst case).
Depleted uranium is a handy substance for 20 mm shells, though, which is why
there is a lot of it in Iraq/Kuwait. It is exceedingly heavy, and has a
decent tensile strength, making it very suitable as a kinetic weapon for
dstroying tanks and other armored vehicles.
--
Mike
Assistant Professor of Physics, USAFA
"This content in no way reflects the opinions, standards, or policy of
the United States Air Force Academy or the United States government."
Mathew Hendry
danny burstein (dan...@panix.com) wrote:
[aluminium "magic defrosting thingies"]
: Even better yet, get a metalic material that is both massive and
: thermally conductive. Oh, and cheap.
:
: Hmm, depleted uranium would fill the bill perfectly. And, even better,
: it's a heat producer of its own!
How does that work? _Depleted_ Uranium is of course non-radioactive.
Dave/Kristin Hall
Bill Welch (bi...@moonmoth.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: In article <4liuki$j...@lnsnews.lns.cornell.edu>, Karen L Lingel
: <k...@lns598.lns.cornell.edu> writes
:
: >As a bonus recommendation: You can achieve the effects of
: >"Silver Lightning" by using regular old aluminum foil (plus the
: >baking soda and boiling water.)
:
: I was using aluminium milk bottle tops, washing soda and hot water 30
: years ago. So it works with baking soda too, does it?
Uh, does somebody want to translate "Silver Lightning" for those of us
who are obviously unenlightened?
Karen L Lingel
In article <4lqke3$o...@panix.com>, dan...@panix.com (danny burstein) writes:
> "Warning: not for use by children or women of child-bearing years. Do not
>stack more than fifty together. Do not use for illumination"
"Do not taunt Miracle Food Warmer".
Jason Ledtke
Ok... my $.02 defrosting trick that probably works as well as a
"miracle thaw" or whatever...
Place a small amount of water (room temp or warm) in a pan. Place Saran
Wrap (or equivelent) over the pan and water. Place your meat or
whatever your de-thawing on the saran. Place another layer of saran,
then cover it with more water. The net effect is your saran wrapped
meat surrounded with H2O.
I'm a college student, and don't have the foresight to start dethawing
stuff in a timely manner, and found this trick works very well. The
water has a high heat capacity, and doesn't cool *much* relative to the
meat (or whatever frozen goods you're dethawing). By protecting it with
Saran in this layering fashion, you're exposing a lot of surface area to
the water... which more quickly removes heat than air could (same way
65F pool water is very cold, but 65F air is tolerable). You also avoid
the damage caused by water-logging with the saran barrier. If you're
real good, you can seal the meat in a Ziplock baggie... but air makes it
float and insulates it... requiring longer for a defrost. Using this
method, a single chicken breast takes ~10 minutes, but your mileage may
vary.
-Jason Ledtke
Mark & Lara Alewine
theh...@ridgecrest.ca.us (Dave/Kristin Hall) wrote:
>howard kennett (hken...@mit.edu) wrote:
>: > In article <4lhnkq$a...@news.mixcom.com>, chp <ch...@mixcom.com> wrote:
>: > >I've seen TV commercials for a product called "Miracle Thaw", or
>: I bought one of them and would recommend it as useful but no miracle.
>: It's a heavy metal plate on stubby little feet. The surface is slightly
>: grooved and feels rather like teflon. The heat is provided by your very
>: own hot water. Before and several times during the thaw period you are
>: required to rinse the plate under the hottest water you can muster. the
>: process is rather a pain and IMHO does not produce an end product that
>: is noticeably better than a slow thaw. Also, the plate is only about 12"
>: by 6" (an estimate, I don't have it here with me at work) so you can't
>: do much food at one time. It works well only for flat pieces. It is as
>: fast as they say but you have to be there rinsing and turning the entire
>: time. The thing I like least about it is that I will always have to
>: reread the directions for use (and be able to find them!!) since times,
>: etc. vary with the size of the object begin thawed.
>Suggestion (IE, what I use at home):
> Rather than going out and buying an over-priced hunk of metal that
>is too small to work very well, you might want to wander over to your
>friendly neighborhood scrap metal dealer. I ended up with a (roughly)
>two foot square by one inch thick slab of aluminum. It works great.
>It's large enough for four large T-bone steaks, doesn't require repeated
>heating (although I do run it under warm water to start), and cost me
><going-rate-for-scrap-aluminum>+$5. Obviously, YMMV.
>Oh, and be sure to clean it *WELL* before using it.
>-Dave "I refuse to pay overly-inflated prices for a chunk of metal" Hall
>--
>David Hall | Kristin Hall
>Propulsion Performance Office | no real job as yet...
>Naval Air Warfare Ctr, Weapons Div | we live in B.F.E.
>----------------------------------------------------------------
>"Look, you two post funny posts, but, Jesus Christ, have some
>self respect. This had to be one of the sickest posts I've
>read on alt.tasteless!" -Damon Chetson
I saw a special on some news program... don't remember which... that
tested them. None lived up to promised defrost times. Some even took
so long that they were deemed unsafe. Outer layers of meat were at a
dangerous bacteria growing temp. for too long. Sortof like thawing on
the counter. Safest way is to plan ahead and thaw in the fridge or in
the microwave if you don't mind the rubber chicken feel. ;-)
Lara
Bill Welch
In article <DqHJy...@ridgecrest.ca.us>, Dave/Kristin Hall
<theh...@ridgecrest.ca.us> writes
>Bill Welch (bi...@moonmoth.demon.co.uk) wrote:
>: In article <4liuki$j...@lnsnews.lns.cornell.edu>, Karen L Lingel
>: <k...@lns598.lns.cornell.edu> writes
>:
>: >As a bonus recommendation: You can achieve the effects of
>: >"Silver Lightning" by using regular old aluminum foil (plus the
>: >baking soda and boiling water.)
>:
>: I was using aluminium milk bottle tops, washing soda and hot water 30
>: years ago. So it works with baking soda too, does it?
>:
>
>Uh, does somebody want to translate "Silver Lightning" for those of us
>who are obviously unenlightened?
The chemicals involved tell me that this is a way to get sulphide stains
off silverware by turning them back to silver. This, in theory, stops
silver plate wearing away, and it's certainly easier than using silver
polish on cutlery and trying to get inside fork tines.
My 'A' Level chemistry tells me it's done with nascent hydrogen -
hydrogen just freed from another molecule and still in the atomic state,
and therefore more reactive than molecular hydrogen. It takes the
sulphur out of the sulphide and leaves behind the metallic silver.
Of course this chemistry may be out of date by now ..
--
Nude giant delineates Bill Welch's vaguely-arched digit!
grrc
In article <31818A...@msn.com>, Jason Ledtke <Jason_...@msn.com> wrote:
>Ok... my $.02 defrosting trick that probably works as well as a
>"miracle thaw" or whatever...
>
I am probably not the only who will ask why you would want to dethaw some
thing before you cooked it. (quick get me 2 steaks from the freezer and
unthaw them -- um, if they are in the freezer they ARE unthawed <my
response to a chef I worked with shortly before he started throwing knives>)
>-Jason Ledtke
Rodger
Bill Welch
In article <olTzhhy00...@andrew.cmu.edu>, "Andrew C. Plotkin"
<erky...@CMU.EDU> writes
>Bill Welch <bi...@moonmoth.demon.co.uk> writes:
>> >As a bonus recommendation: You can achieve the effects of
>> >"Silver Lightning" by using regular old aluminum foil (plus the
>> >baking soda and boiling water.)
>>
>> I was using aluminium milk bottle tops, washing soda and hot water 30
>> years ago. So it works with baking soda too, does it?
>
>same thing?
No, "washing soda" is sodium carbonate. "Baking soda" means the same in
the UK as in the USA. (But I'm sure we can change that if we work on
it.)
--
Frightful aardvark warps Bill Welch's curiously-jellied resistor!
Dave/Kristin Hall
: : Hmm, depleted uranium would fill the bill perfectly. And, even better,
: : it's a heat producer of its own!
: How does that work? _Depleted_ Uranium is of course non-radioactive.
Do you actually believe that depleted uranium is 100.00% pure depleted
uranium? Bwhahhahahaha! Not likely. There's still enough of the
good stuff in it to be a problem for folks who are stupid enough to
wear it around their necks. [There are sections of this base that
have been shut down due to radiation poisoning as a result of the
extensive testing of DU rounds.] Granted, there isn't much, and ye
ol' gubbmint does everything it can to remove all the good stuff
first (they've got other designs for it), but the process isn't perfect.
: I believe that there are treaties which enforce the use of depleted Uranium
: for armour-piercing rounds, because active Uranium is considered tooo nasty
: for use in killing tank crews...
While I have no knowledge of treaties, I seriously doubt any such treaties
exist. Think about it, why would a country use hot uranium rounds? I
mean, that stuff is *useful* for other things and costs a *SHITLOAD* of
money to produce. DU, on the other hand, is pretty much a waste product.
To put it another way...
Suppose you have a mountain of hot uranium lying around. What could you
do with it? Well, you could build bombs, fuel reactors, do all sorts of
research into radioactivity.....in short, it has many uses.
Now, suppose you have a mountain of cold uranium lying around. What could
you do with it? Well, you could build.... Hmmm... It's really only good
for two things, shielding (but there are cheaper materials for this) or
bullets (where it absolutely excells).
And so, I think you'll find that treaties aside, armies have no desire
to shoot you with radioactive bullets.
Mathew Hendry
[Newsgroups: line trimmed]
Dave/Kristin Hall (theh...@ridgecrest.ca.us) wrote:
: Mathew Hendry (m.he...@dial.pipex.com) wrote:
: : I believe that there are treaties which enforce the use of depleted Uranium
: : for armour-piercing rounds, because active Uranium is considered tooo nasty
: : for use in killing tank crews...
:
: While I have no knowledge of treaties, I seriously doubt any such treaties
: exist. Think about it, why would a country use hot uranium rounds?
The way I heard it, the Germans came across a large (and presumably well
distributed ;) supply of the stuff during the Second World War. They found
this stockpile in Belgium, IIRC, though I have no idea for what purpose the
material was originally intended.
Because at the time they had no other practical use for it, the Germans put
their ultra-cheap Uranium to "good" use in armour-piercing rounds. Soon after
the war the practice was outlawed.
Of course, nowadays nobody would be silly enough to waste hot Uranium on such
a puny type of weaponry, when much more destructive and/or profitable
applications are available for it.
-- Mat.
Mike J. M.
In article <317E9A...@cyber-kitchen.com>, Mimi Hiller <mi...@cyber-kitchen.com> wrote:
>I have two wonderful aluminum cookie sheets that I prop up on the counter
>slightly and the stuff thaws out quick as a wink on those.
I'm glad to see this thread, as just last weekend I was at my mother's house
and she'd purchased one of these thawing slabs. So I decided to test it, by
placing two ice cubes each on the thawing thing, an aluminum cookie sheet, and
(as a control) a plastic cutting board.
The thawing device won. The cookie sheet wasn't terribly far behind, and of
course, the ice on the plastic cutting board was hardly melted.
Obviously the thawing device and the cookie sheet did better than the plastic
because they're both made out of aluminum.
My guess is that the thawing device came out ahead of the cookie sheet because
it has little "channels" in it that carry the melted water away. Maybe this
aids the melting process?
- Mike
An American TWIG in London
http://twig.hypercon.com
Peter Ceresole
In article <19960502.4...@ai084.du.pipex.com>,
m.he...@dial.pipex.com (Mathew Hendry) wrote:
>The way I heard it, the Germans came across a large (and presumably well
>distributed ;) supply of the stuff during the Second World War. They found
>this stockpile in Belgium, IIRC, though I have no idea for what purpose the
>material was originally intended.
>
>Because at the time they had no other practical use for it, the Germans put
>their ultra-cheap Uranium to "good" use in armour-piercing rounds. Soon after
>the war the practice was outlawed.
Odd. This seems to come up regularly. It's not true; the Germans used
tungsten in armour piercing rounds, like everybody else.
The Belgian/Congolese uranium finished up in the Haigerloch (spelling?)
reactor at the end of the war. Luckily, they didn't get the numbers right.
--
Peter
Jeremy Konopka
In article <4mcnc5$b...@earth.superlink.net>,
Mike J. M. <mo...@mars.superlink.net> wrote:
[snip]
>she'd purchased one of these thawing slabs. So I decided to test it, by
>placing two ice cubes each on the thawing thing, an aluminum cookie sheet, and
>(as a control) a plastic cutting board.
>The thawing device won. The cookie sheet wasn't terribly far behind, and of
>course, the ice on the plastic cutting board was hardly melted.
>
>it has little "channels" in it that carry the melted water away. Maybe this
>aids the melting process?
I'm guessing that the wondermelter is thicker than the cookie sheet, right?
In that case, it's got more heat stored up in it to give off to the ice, so it
will help with the melting. The cookie sheet has to do more of its work as
a heat sink as time goes by (absorbing ambient heat) while for something small
like an ice cube, the wonderthaw can probably rely on itself.
-- J
Lee M. Jones
i bought a miracle thaw as well, and i can
say they really do work. why? they are simply
a metal with a high thermal conductivity. if you
look in a heat transfer book you will see that
metals like aluminum have much higher thermal
conductivites than steel. for example, at 300K
(room temperature) the thermal conductivity of
stainless steel is about 18 W/m/K. by contrast, at the
same temperature aluminum is about 250 W/m/K and
aluminum alloys are about 180 W/m/K. so over a given
temperature difference and area, the Al can
move ten times as much heat as the steel. your counter
top, cookie sheet, etc have lower conductivities, and thus
lesser abilities in thawing things in a miraculous fashion.
also, the thickness of the cookie sheet is a factor, but not because
it "stored" any more heat. the thickness of the metal
allows the heat to be conducted more easily to the
object being thawed.
these objects do work, but you have to flip the meat
or whatever over a few times. this is because the meat
itself impedes the heat transfer, and by flipping the
thawed side over, you can then thaw the other side.
i would recommed one to anyone who cooks a lot of
chicken breasts and hates defrosting them in a microwave,
or waiting for them in the fridge. i can defrost a
half pound chicken breast in about 20 minutes. i _love_
that. :)
Lee M. Jones
jo...@central.iat.utexas.edu __o
The University of Texas at Austin -\<,
Institute for Advanced Technology ( )/( )
SAM EARMAN
In article <4mjb0l$a...@sue.cc.uregina.ca>,
Jeremy Konopka <kon...@ARISTOTLE.CS.UREGINA.CA> wrote:
>I'm guessing that the wondermelter is thicker than the cookie sheet, right?
>In that case, it's got more heat stored up in it to give off to the ice, so it
>will help with the melting. The cookie sheet has to do more of its work as
>a heat sink as time goes by (absorbing ambient heat) while for something small
>like an ice cube, the wonderthaw can probably rely on itself.
I recently read an article about this somewhere. It is not that any device
"stores up" heat, but that the devices are able to -conduct- the heat
already present in the room into your frozen stuff better than air alone.
The article mentioned, though that to speed up the process, some of the
"wonder" thawing devices suggested dipping them in hot water first, which
would store up heat. The article basically said that using a heavy metal
pan would work just as well as a "wonder thawer".
John Dingman
In article <318D3C...@central.iat.utexas.edu>, "Lee M. Jones"
<jo...@central.iat.utexas.edu> wrote:
:
: these objects do work, but you have to flip the meat
: or whatever over a few times. this is because the meat
: itself impedes the heat transfer, and by flipping the
: thawed side over, you can then thaw the other side.
: i would recommed one to anyone who cooks a lot of
: chicken breasts and hates defrosting them in a microwave,
: or waiting for them in the fridge. i can defrost a
: half pound chicken breast in about 20 minutes. i _love_
: that. :)
Of course, everything else you read states that it is not safe to thaw at room
temperature.
--john
***********************************
EYE wanna rock & roll all niiiight,
and party ev-er-ree day. *Kiss*
***********************************
"If we're not supposed to eat animals, why are they made out of meat?"
Larry Polnicky
Jeremy Konopka wrote:
>
> Mike J. M. <mo...@mars.superlink.net> wrote:
> [snip]
> >she'd purchased one of these thawing slabs. So I decided to test it, by
> >placing two ice cubes each on the thawing thing, an aluminum cookie sheet, and
> >(as a control) a plastic cutting board.
> >The thawing device won. The cookie sheet wasn't terribly far behind, and of
> >course, the ice on the plastic cutting board was hardly melted.
> >
> >My guess is that the thawing device came out ahead of the cookie sheet because
> >it has little "channels" in it that carry the melted water away. Maybe this
> >aids the melting process?
I believe the channels are there to drain away melted water or other juices, but only to
enhance the thawing ability of the thawing board. Face it, unless you are doing the ice
cube test, not much liquid is going to come out of a steak, chop or chicken breast.
I have experimented and I can tell you for food items other than ice cubes (assuming an
ice cube can be classified as a food item!) the Miracle Thaw works well. I can thaw a
fully frozen boneless chicken breast in about 15 minutes, whereas leaving it on a cookie
sheet or other surface takes well over an hour or several hours depending on room
temperature.
I was dubious about these thawing plates, but they do seem to work. Between the
overreaching government regulations and the market itself, the Miracle Thaw seems to
pass muster.
BTW, I have seen some versions that come with a clear plastic bubble cover. I wonder if
they interfere with the device's ability to thaw.
--
Larry Polnicky
lpol...@mar.lmco.com
"I deal with temptation by yielding to it."
--attributed to Mark Twain
richard moreno
Val Eckertson <veck...@kandinsky.hf.intel.com> wrote:
>I bought one of these, took it back, It didn't work. Got a different
>brand as a Christmas gift, took that on back too. I have a tile
>countertop and someone suggested it might interfere with the heat
>transfer of the tray. The tile did feel colder than usual under the
>tray, so I used it on a wooden surface. It still didn't work as
>advertised. I'll go back and use my microware to defrost.
>May
A news station in Phoenix tested that device and found it to work
ok, but found if you put something to defrost in a teflon pan the
results were quicker.
Tom Royer
For all interested in the Miracle Thaw defroster, I refer you to
the March/April issue of the "Journal of Irreproducible Results" and the
arcticle on page 14, "The Return of Maxwell's Demon?"
The rest of the "Journal" is good, too.
--
Tom Royer
"If you're not free to fail, you're not free." - - Gene Burns
Jeremy Konopka
In article <318F5A...@mar.lmco.com>,
Larry Polnicky <lpol...@mar.lmco.com> wrote:
>Jeremy Konopka wrote:
>> Mike J. M. <mo...@mars.superlink.net> wrote:
>> [snip]
>> >she'd purchased one of these thawing slabs. So I decided to test it, by
>> >placing two ice cubes each on the thawing thing, an aluminum cookie sheet, and
>> >(as a control) a plastic cutting board.
>> >The thawing device won. The cookie sheet wasn't terribly far behind, and of
>> >course, the ice on the plastic cutting board was hardly melted.
>> >My guess is that the thawing device came out ahead of the cookie sheet because
>> >it has little "channels" in it that carry the melted water away. Maybe this
>> >aids the melting process?
Get your attributions right. I didn't write that channel crap. I still say
it's because this thing has lots of thermal mass (as would a thick skillet).
>I believe the channels are there to drain away melted water or other juices, but only to
>enhance the thawing ability of the thawing board. Face it, unless you are doing the ice
>cube test, not much liquid is going to come out of a steak, chop or chicken breast.
PS, format 80 characters, it's the convention.
[snip]
-- J
leon garde
"Lee M. Jones" <jo...@central.iat.utexas.edu> writes:
>Jeremy Konopka wrote:
>>
>> In article <4mcnc5$b...@earth.superlink.net>,
>> Mike J. M. <mo...@mars.superlink.net> wrote:
>> [snip]
>> >she'd purchased one of these thawing slabs. So I decided to test it, by
>> >placing two ice cubes each on the thawing thing, an aluminum cookie sheet, and
>> >(as a control) a plastic cutting board.
>> >The thawing device won. The cookie sheet wasn't terribly far behind, and of
>> >course, the ice on the plastic cutting board was hardly melted.
>> >
Why buy a new gadget when you alreay have one to do the same trick ?
Wrap the frozen thing to keep it hygienic and put the food in front
of a FAN. the fan will cause more heat to be absorbed over
the entire surface of the frozen object.
That should beat any wonderthaw board !
Will anyone do this experiment ?
leon