4 ms·

I'm replying to my own comment here, but I wanted to clarify something with hysteresis. Heating water (or food, or a pan) up to a certain temperature takes more

I'm replying to my own comment here, but I wanted to clarify something with hysteresis. Heating water (or food, or a pan) up to a certain temperature takes more energy than maintaining that temperature. It appears that the temperature setting on my induction burner uses the same amount of energy regardless. So it will bring the water to a boil when I use the 212F setting, but once it's there, it requires less energy to maintain that temp, but the induction burner doesn't adjust accordingly. So, instead of turning the amount of energy down to maintain 212F, it just cycles on and off hysteritically. With a gas or electric stove, I can turn the heat up, and once it reaches boiling, I can turn the heat down slightly, maintaining the current level of boiling (because there's "simmer", "boil" or "rolling boil", for example).

EricE 5y ago
I fail to see why you can't do that with induction - indeed I do that all the time with induction. The cycle is just a lot shorter with induction. Waiting for integrated temperature control to become more of a thing with induction - higher end cooktops have it; just needs to percolate down. My GE cooktop had a bluetooth probe that worked great at lower temperatures - but usually you want automatic temp control more on the high end - frying and candymaking is what I was missing. I guess if you made lots of delicate sauces the bluetooth probe would have been a godsend and maybe that's what they were going for. Probably cheaper, easier and more reliable to only have a lower temp probe too. Just not nearly as useful for what I would have liked!