top 100 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 173 points 1 year ago (4 children)

A guy on YT actually tried it experimentally a few years ago (how many slaps, not how fast one slap); and it works to some degree! The main problem becomes to make a slapping machine that can survive long enough:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LHFhnnTWMgI&pp=ygURc2xhcCBjb29rIGNoaWNrZW7SBwkJzgkBhyohjO8%3D

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] [S] 63 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    YouTube is truly a wonder of stupidity. Sometimes in good ways

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago

    This slap question was a big meme several years ago, and when that video came out (years after the meme), it was an instant hit.

    The fact that this discussion is still going shows how popular it is

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 116 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    Typical physicist, ignoring enthalpy of phase changes. Starting from 1C defrosted makes a huge difference from 0C as the melting takes up a ton more energy/slaps. Their underslapped chicken would give you salmonella

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 27 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Also completely neglecting that not all the energy in a slap will be transferred to thermal energy in the chicken.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 26 points 1 year ago

    They haven't considered rate of slap. Significant heat transfer to environment even at 10 slaps per second.

    They're also assuming sea level standard atmospheric conditions. You may need to reduce rate of slap at altitude.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 57 points 1 year ago (9 children)

    Bro really wanted his chicken well done at 400°F

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 28 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    Naw, that’s burnt.

    Maillard reaction where things brown starts at 350f.

    More than 165/175 in the center and that’s dried out.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    If you spatchcock your bird then you’ve only gotta slap your cock to about 150°F at the thickest part of breast

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    naturally. Best to slow it down and keep it juicy, too. I like smoking them at about 200 f, it's perfection.

    also... way to make spatchcocking sound even dirtier than it is. the no cooks here are probably thinking it's some sort of sex act and the rest of us are wondering if it's not also some sort of sex act.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    I saw your username first.

    Then I misread the rest as a Mallard Reaction.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 45 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Gotta love how everyone forgot about Newton in all this. Enjoy your instantly well-cooked hand, which is also made of meat.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 42 points 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [–] 36 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    Lord have mercy on folks cooking their chicken to 400 F. Those birds will come out as dry as the sands of the Sahara.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    https://youtu.be/hzMzFGgmQOc?t=285

    "well done steaks. if I see a speck of red, it's going back. you better cook my food".

    Signed, a well done meat enjoyer.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    I mean, false equivalency, don't you think? I have yet to meet an enjoyer of medium-rare chicken, probably because the Salmonella or Listeria already took them out

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Right. You can get away with it in beef because the pathogens for that are on the surface. As long as the outside is cooked, it's technically safe to eat. (This does not apply to ground beef, which is all mixed up).

    Chicken and pork have pathogens throughout the meat. They must be cooked all the way through.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

    Technically false. Taenia saginata (beef tapeworm) embeds itself in a cystic form in the skeletal muscle of cattle and is transmitted to humans through consumption of undercooked, contaminated beef. Not very common in North America, and relatively easy to catch during inspection, but youre wrong that undercooked beef is safe to eat, strictly from technical standpoint.

    Also, can you provide evidence of your claim that pathogens only infect the 'surface' of beef, but penetrate chicken and pork?

    That being said, I will always order beef tartare from a reputable restaurant if it's offered. yolo

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)

    It's commonly known among sous vide cooking. The internal temp for sous vide beef is often <60C, and that makes some people nervous. However:

    https://www.americastestkitchen.com/articles/1131-is-sous-vide-safe

    First, let’s talk about what’s dangerous. A few types of bacteria in particular are responsible for most foodborne illness: Salmonella, Escherichia coli, and Campylobacter jejuni. Salmonella, a resilient group of bacteria that is most commonly found in poultry and eggs, is ingested by chickens, and then contaminates their muscle tissue, ­intestines, and ovaries. Salmonella can migrate into the muscle of chickens, meaning that they are contaminated not just on the surface but also inside the meat. Escherichia coli is a general group of bacteria that reside in the intestines of many animals, including humans. But if ingested, some strains of E. coli can wreak havoc. Campylobacter jejuni is a spiral-shaped bacteria that causes one of the most common diarrheal illnesses in humans in America.

    (Edit: emphasis added above)

    This may not be true with techniques like blade tenderization. That can transfer pathogens from the surface to the internals.

    Taenia saginata will die in only 5 minutes at 56C, which is quite a low temp even for sous vide. In fact, most beef jerky recipes will typically set the dehydrator's temperature higher than that. It's typical that slightly lower temps will work if it's done for longer--jerky and sous vide usually takes several hours--but I don't have a chart handy for taenia saginata specifically.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 30 points 1 year ago* (11 children)

    The chicken has to exceed the boiling point of water for it to be cooked? Unless we’re making chicken caramels, I don’t think so.

    Doing some math, I think it works out to 6,242 slaps or a single slap at 1,939 mph. Much more attainable.

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] [S] 21 points 1 year ago* (6 children)

    That 205C would just be the surface temperature of the chicken, not the average. Note that the calculation doesn't take into account the volume or radius

    EDIT: No, I'm wrong. The calculation is for boiling the whole chicken. Who was this written by, a Brit?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago* (4 children)

    Are you sure? The numbers in the tweet reddit post talk about total mass and heat capacity. So I think that means the entire bulk has that average temperature.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] [S] 4 points 1 year ago (3 children)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    Single slap assumes all kinetic into heat, which isn't. Alot is lost to the slap sound, alot more is lost into the flying bits of pulverised chicken bits.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 30 points 1 year ago* (8 children)

    As your friendly neighborhood person with knowledge about food and cooking, 2 pounds is an absurd weight for an uncooked rotisserie chicken, that is a very small and cooked weight, 4-6 pounds is going to be typical. Also, more importantly, you cannot cook something faster by increasing the temperature past a pretty quick point, meat is an excellent insulator. No slap can cook the inside of a frozen chicken unless the entire chicken disintegrates.

    Tbf though, a slap at 3700 mph would absolutely disintegrate the chicken.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago* (5 children)

    Also, if you cooked it to 400 degrees it would be disgusting. You just need to cook it to 165. This guy might know about physics but he has never cooked anything before.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (3 children)

    I've read that bone-in chicken should actually get to 190°F as this is when the collagen renders, but Idk it was on the Internet so...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    This is basically the foundation of barbecue. Off you have a cut of meat that’s tough and high in connective tissue, if you cook it at a low temperature for a long time, once it gets around 190 the collagens start to break down and the meat gets tender. Things like chuck roasts, brisket, pork shoulder.

    This has nothing to do with chicken though. A chicken breast, bone in or not, will be disgustingly dry at 190 degrees.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 21 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

    But how do you get the chicken back from the stratosphere once you've slapped it that fast?

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    Yeah yeah we get it, Newton will fry your hand and pls don't cook a chicken to 205°C core temp.

    BUT! What kinda physics major forgets Newton AND the fact that you won't convert kinetic energy into heat with 100% efficiency?

    I know, three math majors in a trench coat, that's who'll forget it.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 18 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    At this point we have to consider the ambient temperature as well, as the chicken will slightly cool between two slaps once it exceeds it

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 34 points 1 year ago (7 children)
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (3 children)

    Well otherwise it has to stay at some 100 degrees for quite a long time to consider it cooked

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    You need the chicken to be 165F or 74C to be food safe. It takes a long time to cook at 100-200C because the heat is being transferred much slower. If we're using this instant slap-based cooking method, it only needs to get to the food safe temperature.

    Using the OP's calculations and a cooked temperature of 74C:

    It would take 8315 average slaps

    or

    A slap at around 813m/s or 1819mph.

    *Edit for a correction to the second calculation (it still might be wrong), also, I rounded the numbers to whole integers.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago

    In general, chicken needs to be heated to 74C or 165F for a few seconds to kill off dangerous pathogens.

    Here is a list of other times and temperatures for chicken to be considered safe

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    No one's going to point out the absurd starting assumption KE=mcT??

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (5 children)
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    You need a perfect transfer of the kinetic energy to the chicken for that to hold, not a slap

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago

    So has anyone who's actually cooked a chicken before done the math? Because my guy just slapped this poor bird into pure carbon. Did he mean to do 205°F? It's still too high, but it would at least be edible.

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    How many wanks to choke my chicken?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago

    Excellent, physics in service of humanity!

  • source
  • Also at room temperature, the average speed of atoms in the material is at 400 m/s, at least for a gas. That might give you a hint.

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago

    Fucking nerds in the comments^l^ ^love^ ^it^

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago

    Introducing the pneumatic oven range. Place the chicken in the can and press the button... No mess cooking and bone meal blending! High calcium foods!

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

    What if I wanted to cook the chicke through friction, by say inserting an object 3 fingers or so thick in and out of its cavity as fast as athletically possible? ... so um... how long can I keep fucking my chicken?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    Is that less or more the energy of your average Falcon Punch?

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    I think they did this on mythbusters

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    How fast does it cook in a vacuum?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago

    to my knowledge these calculations pretty much have to be assuming a vacuum. IE there's no mention of heat loss between slaps. which would be inevitable as 23k instant slaps, would take considerable time.

  • source
  • parent
  • Where's the link to the YouTube video where someone tried this? I remember listening to it last time someone posted this.

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›