3 ms·
My guess before reading is the resulting chow has more air in it. Edit after reading: I think I am on the money. I don't think it is a completely sphere-packin
by quickthrower2 6y ago
My guess before reading is the resulting chow has more air in it.
Edit after reading: I think I am on the money. I don't think it is a completely sphere-packing phenomenon. Quinoa is fluffy when cooked, not soggy and laiden with completely with water. Packing might contribute but I am betting it's mostly air inside the Quinoa making that extra volume.
- dmoy 6y agoTrivially, you can also just cook some rice on the stove, verify that rice is not spherical, and also verify that it gets significantly bigger. (Like 3x bigger per dry rice unit of volume, and you don't (usually) cook water:rice 2:1 for most rices)
- sitkack 6y agoWhom among us has not overflown a rice pot on the stove?
- sukilot 6y ago2:1 is quite common, because it's simple, despite being not great, especially as amount cooked increases. Rice isn't speherical, but it isn't a perfectly packed crystal either. Unless you think air fills up inside each grain, the volume from "air" is the packing volume.
- OscarCunningham 6y agoExcept that the sphere-packing calculation does actually account for all the additional volume, so if there was some air-absorption too then that must mean that cooked quinoa packs more efficiently than uncooked quinoa.
- ema 6y agoSquishy things should pack more efficiently since they can deform to better fill the voids left. Not sure if this makes a significant difference here though. It's only the weight of the grains above that would cause the deformation to happen and cooked quinoa is only stacked up a few inches max I presume.
- vanderZwan 6y agoYes, but boiling quinoa or rice doesn't pack it, it blows bubbles of steam through it.