Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
kaddyuk
Topic Author
Posts: 3697
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 1:04 am

Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

Mon Jan 22, 2007 1:29 pm

Chocolate Chip Cookies
Ingredients:

  • 532.35 cm3 gluten
  • 4.9 cm3 NaHCO3
  • 4.9 cm3 refined halite
  • 236.6 cm3 partially hydrogenated tallow triglyceride
  • 177.45 cm3 crystalline C12H22O11
  • 177.45 cm3 unrefined C12H22O11
  • 4.9 cm3 methyl ether of protocatechuic aldehyde
  • Two calcium carbonate-encapsulated avian albumen-coated protein
  • 473.2 cm3 theobroma cacao
  • 236.6 cm3 de-encapsulated legume meats (sieve size #10)

    To a 2 litre jacketed round reactor vessel (reactor #1) with an overall heat transfer coefficient of about 100 Btu/°F-ft2-hr, add ingredients one, two and three with constant agitation. In a second 2 litre reactor vessel with a radial flow impeller operating at 100 rpm, add ingredients four, five, six, and seven until the mixture is homogenous.
    To reactor #2, add ingredient eight, followed by three equal volumes of the homogenous mixture in reactor #1. Additionally, add ingredient nine and ten slowly, with constant agitation. Care must be taken at this point in the reaction to control any temperature rise that may be the result of an exothermic reaction.
    Using a screw extrude attached to a #4 nodulizer, place the mixture piece-meal on a 316SS sheet (300 x 600 mm). Heat in a 460°K oven for a period of time that is in agreement with Frank & Johnston's first order rate expression (see JACOS, 21, 55), or until golden brown. Once the reaction is complete, place the sheet on a 25°C heat-transfer table, allowing the product to come to equilibrium.
  • Whoever said "laughter is the best medicine" never had Gonorrhea
     
    TheCheese
    Posts: 151
    Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2004 8:39 am

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Mon Jan 22, 2007 1:56 pm

    I followed this recipe this afternoon, although I left out the nuts.

    Also, you should swap out "...until golden brown." with "...until the admixture shows coloration due to Maillard reaction."
     
    lehpron
    Posts: 6846
    Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2001 3:42 am

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Mon Jan 22, 2007 2:36 pm

    Was the recipe idealized or practical? What is the estimated cost of this venture, revenue & investment? Under what pressure and temperature should this 'experiment' be done?  Wink

    Quoting TheCheese (Reply 1):
    "...until the admixture shows coloration due to Maillard reaction."

    What color frequency should be observed?
    The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
     
    TheCheese
    Posts: 151
    Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2004 8:39 am

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Mon Jan 22, 2007 4:12 pm

    Quoting Lehpron (Reply 2):
    What color frequency should be observed?

    The cookies should be baked until GBD (golden brown and delicious) 859.66 Rankine at one atmosphere for 0.0005952 fortnights should be good, but you might want to give it another couple minutes if you like your cookies crispier.
     
    SlamClick
    Posts: 9576
    Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2003 7:09 am

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Tue Jan 23, 2007 12:49 am

    Well, while this process seems to give pleasing results it appears that commercial application meets with limited success.

    Check corporate aircraft fleet of one prominent lab.

    View Large View Medium
    Click here for bigger photo!

    Photo © Michael Prophet


    They are one of the best, and most well-known producers of this product and yet their flagship is some sixty years old.
    Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
     
    N231YE
    Posts: 2620
    Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 9:24 am

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Tue Jan 23, 2007 1:20 am

    Quoting Kaddyuk (Thread starter):
    Two calcium carbonate-encapsulated avian albumen-coated protein

    Aggg...now that just spoiled my appetite, or any thoughts of eating chocolate chip cookies in the future  yuck 
     
    G4LASRamper
    Posts: 87
    Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 2:35 am

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Tue Jan 23, 2007 4:28 am

    What?!? You don't like mutilated pre-embryonic avian protein? Personally I like it for breakfast, along with nitrated porcine flesh...  Big grin

    Oops. I guess I'd better go find an MD-83 to push or something.
    "A pig that doesn't fly is just a pig." - Porco Rosso
     
    FredT
    Posts: 2166
    Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2002 9:51 pm

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Tue Jan 23, 2007 5:36 am

    Dear Sir,
    we regret to inform you that your description of a procedure for creating sweetened baked so-called "cookies" cannot be accepted by us under the current terms of the contract (THE CONTRACT), as signed by you (THE CONTRACTEE) on the 12th of October 2006.

    In the contract (THE CONTRACT), subchapter 12, annex D-4, it is specified that any procedure pertaining to, or which might be perceived as pertaining to, the preparation of products for ingestion is to be written in accordance with the S1000D standard.

    While your suggested writing at first glance appears to live up to the S1000D standard ('Simplified English') as it is all but completely useless unless you spend hours pouring over it, on closer examination it derives its uselessness from being overly complicated rather than ridiculously oversimplified.

    We expect your prompt reply outlining how you plan to remedy this failure to meet the requirements of the contract (THE CONTRACT).

    If the terms of the contract cannot be met within the stipulated time, we regret to inform you that you will get no milk to go with your cookies.

    Yours sincerely,
    Tom L. Awyer
    I thought I was doing good trying to avoid those airport hotels... and look at me now.
     
    roseflyer
    Posts: 9602
    Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Tue Jan 23, 2007 6:11 am

    Ah yes engineering jokes. I understood everything you wrote there although you messed up your units by using both Kelvin and Celsius. You should be consistent there although all you have to do is add 273. However it is even more concerning that you use a heat transfer coefficient in English units when everything else is metric. What you did is so frustrating in life. I know as an engineer myself, dealing with some metric, some english and some ridiculous units (like what the hell is a teaspoon?) always is a great challenge.

    It is super critical to make your instructions understandable universally. You need to be exact. Would you really want airplanes to be constructed using a judgement call on how large a teaspoon is? In engineering there is a standard for absolutely everything. There are standards for how many decimels to use. There are standards for how to measure things. There are standards for uncertainty analysis. All those things are necessary in the end. Everything in engineering is measured in thousands (that is thousanths (0.001) of an inch).

    With all seriousness though, not all engineers are like that. I'm a mechanical engineer and we work to make things understandable when possible. You should always KISS (Keep it Simple Stupid) when possible.

    [Edited 2007-01-22 22:14:22]
    If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
     
    N231YE
    Posts: 2620
    Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 9:24 am

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Tue Jan 23, 2007 6:12 am

    Quoting G4LASRamper (Reply 6):
    What?!? You don't like mutilated pre-embryonic avian protein?

    Do you like unfertilized avian menstrual discharge?

    Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 8):

    I just noticed that the thread starter failed to include tolerances  wink 

    [Edited 2007-01-22 22:27:57]
     
    FredT
    Posts: 2166
    Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2002 9:51 pm

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Tue Jan 23, 2007 6:54 am

    I always use consistent units.

    I do most of my work in kgin...
    I thought I was doing good trying to avoid those airport hotels... and look at me now.
     
    Analog
    Posts: 1193
    Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2006 3:24 am

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Tue Jan 23, 2007 7:01 am

    Quoting N231YE (Reply 9):

    I just noticed that the thread starter failed to include tolerances

    If not specified they are implied by the number of significant figures, right? That would mean that the tolerances for this recipe are really tight. For example, 532.35 cm3 gluten.
     
    N231YE
    Posts: 2620
    Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 9:24 am

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Tue Jan 23, 2007 7:19 am

    Quoting Analog (Reply 11):
    If not specified they are implied by the number of significant figures, right?

    I am not sure (I am not an engineer), but for the job those cookies are doing, man, the tolerances must be tight. ±.0001 cm3 seems about right  wink 
     
    Jerald01
    Posts: 151
    Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2006 11:35 pm

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Tue Jan 23, 2007 7:37 am

     Silly

    You forgot one thing in youre recipe: Uninhibited ingestion of the product may require the ingestee use larger-than-normal aircraft for transportation to distributors world-wide. Also, full-time production will be postponed due to a just-found problem with the wiring 460 deg K oven. First deliveries will be sometime in the fall of 2007.

    (Anybody know the number of that bakery in Seattle?)
    "There may be old pilots, and there may be bold pilots, but there are darn few green cows"
     
    N215AZ
    Posts: 76
    Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 1:12 pm

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Tue Jan 23, 2007 7:48 am

    Lets just keep it simple shall we?

    Quote:

    * 1 cup butter, room temperature
    * 3/4 cup granulated sugar
    * 1 1/4 cups brown sugar, firmly packed
    * 2 eggs
    * 2 teaspoons vanilla extract
    * 2 1/2 cups all-purpose flour
    * 3/4 teaspoon salt
    * 1 teaspoon baking powder
    * 1 teaspoon baking soda
    * 2 to 3 cups semisweet chocolate chips

    PREPARATION:
    In large mixing bowl cream butter and sugars until light. Beat in the eggs and vanilla.
    Sift together the flour, salt baking powder, and soda; stir into the first mixture, blending well. Stir in chocolate chips.

    N215AZ
    "Atra esterní ono thelduin, Mor'ranr lífa unin hjarta onr, Un du evarínya ono varda."
     
    SlamClick
    Posts: 9576
    Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2003 7:09 am

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Tue Jan 23, 2007 8:17 am

    Ahh, engineers, always underestimating the standards used by the rest of us.

    Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 8):
    (like what the hell is a teaspoon?)



    Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 8):
    using a judgement call on how large a teaspoon is

    One teaspoon has nothing to do with the size of any given spoon.
    It is 1/3 of a tablespoon or 1/48 of a cup which is 8 fluid ounces.
    8 fluid ounces = 237 ml
    Put another way:

    48 teaspoons (tsp) = 8 fl oz. or 237mililiters.

    ergo

    1 teaspoon equals 4.9375 mililiters.

    Precise enough for an engineer except that the perishable ingredients in the above compound will probably become unusable during the mensuration process.
    Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
     
    N231YE
    Posts: 2620
    Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 9:24 am

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Tue Jan 23, 2007 12:06 pm

    All of you engineers failed at one thing: you didn't "draft" a cookie!

    I am not an engineer, so mind the numerous violations of ANSI code  silly 

     
    User avatar
    TZTriStar500
    Posts: 891
    Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2004 1:33 am

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Tue Jan 23, 2007 12:15 pm

    Quoting SlamClick (Reply 15):
    Ahh, engineers, always underestimating the standards used by the rest of us.

    What do you mean by this?
    35 years of American Trans Air/ATA Airlines, 1973-2008. A great little airline that will not be soon forgotten.
     
    kaddyuk
    Topic Author
    Posts: 3697
    Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 1:04 am

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Tue Jan 23, 2007 2:24 pm

    Quoting N231YE (Reply 16):
    All of you engineers failed at one thing: you didn't "draft" a cookie!

    I can guarentee that my Drawing is not effective to my kitchen and i'll have to send it back ala DOI!
    Whoever said "laughter is the best medicine" never had Gonorrhea
     
    SlamClick
    Posts: 9576
    Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2003 7:09 am

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Wed Jan 24, 2007 12:33 am

    Quoting TZTriStar500 (Reply 17):
    What do you mean by this?

    Did you read the rest of my post? It was direct refutation of the post above it, by an engineer, where he assumed that a "teaspoon" was not a finite, standardized unit.
    Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
     
    777236ER
    Posts: 12213
    Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Wed Jan 24, 2007 1:08 am

    Mathematician: 3 is a prime, 5 is a prime, 7 is a prime, and by induction - every odd integer higher than 2 is a prime.
    Physicist: 3 is a prime, 5 is a prime, 7 is a prime, 9 is an experimental error, 11 is a prime. Just to be sure, try several randomly chosen numbers: 17 is a prime, 23 is a prime...
    Engineer: 3 is a prime, 5 is a prime, 7 is a prime, 9 is an approximation to a prime, 11 is a prime,...
    Programmer (reading the output on the screen): 3 is a prime, 3 is a prime, 3 a is prime, 3 is a prime....
    Biologist: 3 is a prime, 5 is a prime, 7 is a prime, 9 -- results have not arrived yet,...
    Psychologist: 3 is a prime, 5 is a prime, 7 is a prime, 9 is a prime but tries to suppress it,...
    Chemist (or Dan Quayle): What's a prime?
    Politician: "Some numbers are prime.. but the goal is to create a kinder, gentler society where all numbers are prime... "
    Programmer: "Wait a minute, I think I have an algorithm from Knuth on finding prime numbers... just a little bit longer, I've found the last bug... no, that's not it... ya know, I think there may be a compiler bug here - oh, did you want IEEE-998.0334 rounding or not? - was that in the spec? - hold on, I've almost got it - I was up all night working on this program, ya know... now if management would just get me that new workstation that just came out, I'd be done by now... etc., etc. ..."
    Your bone's got a little machine
     
    lehpron
    Posts: 6846
    Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2001 3:42 am

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Wed Jan 24, 2007 7:13 am

    Quoting TheCheese (Reply 3):
    Quoting Lehpron (Reply 2):
    What color frequency should be observed?

    The cookies should be baked until GBD (golden brown and delicious) 859.66 Rankine at one atmosphere for 0.0005952 fortnights should be good, but you might want to give it another couple minutes if you like your cookies crispier.

    I was looking for a frequency or wavelength of color, so my question has not been answered yet.  Smile

    Quoting 777236ER (Reply 20):

    That's like putting a mathematician and an engineer on one side of a room and a girl on the other side and tell them they have to cut the distance between them and the girl every time they get closer. Ask them when they get the girl, the mathematician will say "never" and the engineer will say, "close enough".  Wink
    The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
     
    AsstChiefMark
    Posts: 10465
    Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 2:14 pm

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Wed Jan 24, 2007 7:41 am

    Don't forget prolactin-induced bovine mammarian secretions!

    Mark
    Red tail...Red tail...Red tail...Red tail...Red tail...Red tail...Red tail...Red tail...Damned MSP...Red tail...Red tail
     
    ContnlEliteCMH
    Posts: 1391
    Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 8:19 am

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Wed Jan 24, 2007 7:46 am

    Quoting Lehpron (Reply 21):
    I was looking for a frequency or wavelength of color, so my question has not been answered yet.

    The color of the finished product, not including the granular ingredients not homogenized by the radial flow impeller, should be Pantone "Golden Brown 18-0940 TC." Visual comparison is sufficient for conformity to this standard. Incandescent or fluorescent lighting is acceptable for inspection. Uniformity is desired but not required.
    Christianity. Islam. Hinduism. Anthropogenic Global Warming. All are matters of faith!
     
    N231YE
    Posts: 2620
    Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 9:24 am

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Wed Jan 24, 2007 11:30 am

    Quoting Lehpron (Reply 21):
    I was looking for a frequency or wavelength of color, so my question has not been answered yet.

    How about inducing an exothermic reaction of the product under a radiation of a peak wavelength of ~3µm?   

    Edited for small error in facts

    [Edited 2007-01-24 03:35:31]
     
    User avatar
    TZTriStar500
    Posts: 891
    Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2004 1:33 am

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Thu Jan 25, 2007 1:20 am

    Quoting SlamClick (Reply 19):
    Did you read the rest of my post? It was direct refutation of the post above it, by an engineer, where he assumed that a "teaspoon" was not a finite, standardized unit.

    Yes, but in cooking, a teaspoon is not a finite unit. However, this is arguing semantics.

    I do remember that you are the guy that generally dislikes engineers and pounces on anything about them because we have no semblance of reality right?  Yeah sure
    35 years of American Trans Air/ATA Airlines, 1973-2008. A great little airline that will not be soon forgotten.
     
    Jerald01
    Posts: 151
    Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2006 11:35 pm

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Thu Jan 25, 2007 4:04 am

    How about inducing an exothermic reaction of the product under a radiation of a peak wavelength of ~3µm?
     expressionless   idea 

    While bombardment of the mass by freed electrons may produce the required exothermic reaction to adequately homogenize the several ingredients into one delectable dietary delight, said bombardment will not produce the aesthetic surface colorization, thereby reducing the "like-able like-liness" by a factor of 3.28872 (plus or minus one half a smidgen, of course.)
    "There may be old pilots, and there may be bold pilots, but there are darn few green cows"
     
    roseflyer
    Posts: 9602
    Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Thu Jan 25, 2007 4:27 am

    Quoting N231YE (Reply 16):
    All of you engineers failed at one thing: you didn't "draft" a cookie!

    I am not an engineer, so mind the numerous violations of ANSI code

    Wow I can't believe you drafted a picture of a cookie. You even did it properly with the three views and showing an isometric. Of course you need to add some notes to that drawing. For example those are after cooking dimensions. You would need to draft an intermediate state of how you form them before the oven because otherwise it would be impossible to get the cookie to specifications.

    Quoting SlamClick (Reply 15):
    Ahh, engineers, always underestimating the standards used by the rest of us.

    I never knew that a teaspoon was an exact measurements. However the measuring device of a teaspoon is a horrible one.

    Quoting Analog (Reply 11):
    Quoting N231YE (Reply 9):

    I just noticed that the thread starter failed to include tolerances

    If not specified they are implied by the number of significant figures, right? That would mean that the tolerances for this recipe are really tight. For example, 532.35 cm3 gluten.

    There are assumed tolerances on every number even if they are not specified. Depending on the standards you are using, it is usually about half of the second smallest significant digit shown. Now there are systematic and random errors. They can be calculated different ways using standard deviations and examining hysterisis. Regardless, error is always a crucial point and is often the hardest part of an engineering design.
    If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
     
    ContnlEliteCMH
    Posts: 1391
    Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 8:19 am

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Thu Jan 25, 2007 7:34 am

    Quoting Jerald01 (Reply 26):
    While bombardment of the mass by freed electrons may produce the required exothermic reaction to adequately homogenize the several ingredients into one delectable dietary delight, said bombardment will not produce the aesthetic surface colorization, thereby reducing the "like-able like-liness" by a factor of 3.28872 (plus or minus one half a smidgen, of course.)

    I believe you'll find that electron bombardment may be suitable for examining microscopic properties of the ingredients, it is not effectual for temperature increases due to excitation of dihydrogen oxide. For that, you need magentron-induced radiation of peak wavelength ~3µm. (Thanks N342YE!)
    Christianity. Islam. Hinduism. Anthropogenic Global Warming. All are matters of faith!
     
    sphealey
    Posts: 326
    Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 12:39 am

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Thu Jan 25, 2007 11:57 am

    > However it is even more concerning that you use
    > a heat transfer coefficient in English units when
    > everything else is metric. What you did is so
    > frustrating in life.

    Legacy equipment in the manufacturing facility, coupled with lack of capital funds to support purchase of ISO-standard replacements.

    sPh
     
    BAE146QT
    Posts: 981
    Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 4:58 am

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Thu Jan 25, 2007 10:03 pm

    Quoting RoseFlyer:
    I never knew that a teaspoon was an exact measurements. However the measuring device of a teaspoon is a horrible one.

    It would be if you were using it to measure the length of the I-95, but it's perfect for putting the right amount of sugar in my coffee.

    One, please.
    Todos mis dominós son totalmente pegajosos
     
    SlamClick
    Posts: 9576
    Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2003 7:09 am

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Fri Jan 26, 2007 1:50 am

    Quoting TZTriStar500 (Reply 25):
    However, this is arguing semantics.

    You are cordially invited to remember that this is a frivolous thread making fun of engineers. Arguing semantics is virtually all this thread is about.

    Quoting TZTriStar500 (Reply 25):
    Yes, but in cooking, a teaspoon is not a finite unit.

    Then you know some very careless cooks. Approximately might be okay when you are opening a can of pork and beans but it will never do in gourmet cooking and most especially not when expanding a recipe "for four" to serve fifty people. My wife spent many years in the restaurant business, mostly "fine dining" dinner houses in La Jolla, Lake Tahoe and Reno. Her culinary experience rivals my aeronautical experience. Every chef we know (and that is MANY) measures accurately and a "teaspoon" means precisely 1/3 of a tablespoon or 1/48 of a cup which means precisely eight fluid ounces and precisely its metric equivalent.

    My wife owned a small business making mostly cheesecake and carrot cake for the restaurants of the town. She could easily make a terriffic cheescake without measuring anything. It would be one of the best you ever tasted. But she did not work that way, she measured every component of every cake as precisely as the technology permits. That is, with a flat-topped measuring cup, shaken down, and the top scraped off flush with some implement - EXACTLY as she'd been taught by the professionals.

    Quoting TZTriStar500 (Reply 25):
    you are the guy that generally dislikes engineers

    Oh, I wouldn't say I "dislike" them. I have any number of engineer friends. I nearly married an engineer. That doesn't mean I can't be amused or even annoyed by a particular personality quirk common to engineers. You know the one - it is the entire subject of this thread.

    Quoting TZTriStar500 (Reply 25):
    pounces on anything about them

    Sorry. Am I supposed to stand in such awe of their education that I can let an error in their data stand unchallenged? To wit:

    Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 8):
    ridiculous units (like what the hell is a teaspoon?) always is a great challenge.

    It is super critical to make your instructions understandable universally. You need to be exact. Would you really want airplanes to be constructed using a judgement call on how large a teaspoon is? In engineering there is a standard for absolutely everything.

    [underlining mine]
    Now, as RoseFlyer is a "mechanical engineer" I felt obliged to correct a mistaken assumption on his part - which he has duly acknowledged.

    Quoting TZTriStar500 (Reply 25):
    no semblance of reality right

    I believe it is a common complaint, and not entirely unfounded, that engineers could benefit from additional "real world" experience. There are a few products, designed by engineers which have been enormously improved by lay users.

    Now tell me, is it scientific to be defensive about one's profession or is that human?
    Would Spock feel that way?  Smile

    Now I will agree with the engineers and the precise thinkers who opine that the measurements commonly used in cooking are an absurd hodgepodge of archaic, hard to comprehend units. But their meanings are not imprecise.
    Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
     
    sphealey
    Posts: 326
    Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 12:39 am

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Fri Jan 26, 2007 2:02 am

    A teaspoon is an ANSI unit[1]. Which isn't to say that most measuring spoons on the market are either consistent or accurate  Wink

    People whom I trust in the baking world state that these ANSI measuring spoons are manufactured to laboratory tolerences. I have not tested them myself though.

    sPh

    [1]Actually, it might also be one of those SI units that are kept in the "basement" of the SI standard for conversion purposes, since so many food-related measurements (even in the EU) use it. I don't have time to dig that up right now though.

     
    BAE146QT
    Posts: 981
    Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 4:58 am

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Fri Jan 26, 2007 2:25 am

    Quote:
    Actually, it might also be one of those SI units that are kept in the "basement" of the SI standard for conversion purposes,

    A teaspoon in Europe is 5ml.
    Todos mis dominós son totalmente pegajosos
     
    SlamClick
    Posts: 9576
    Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2003 7:09 am

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Fri Jan 26, 2007 2:26 am

    Quoting Sphealey (Reply 32):
    most measuring spoons on the market are either consistent or accurate

    That is not important. It is the numerical value of the quantity stated that matters. When expanding a recipe you don't think Campbell's Soup picks up a spoon out of the drawer and measures 66,000 individual portions of dessicated chicken stock into the vat do you?

    It is all mathematics until one single measurement is taken.

    In all seriousness, baking (as in cookies) is chemistry and tiny variances can ruin a batch. There is enough slack in individual tastes that any single batch is not critical. But most men think their wives read "one teaspoon of..." and reach in the drawer for any old spoon. Maybe their wives do, but cooks do not, and chefs emphatically do not.
    Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
     
    roseflyer
    Posts: 9602
    Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Fri Jan 26, 2007 6:08 am

    Quoting SlamClick (Reply 31):
    I believe it is a common complaint, and not entirely unfounded, that engineers could benefit from additional "real world" experience. There are a few products, designed by engineers which have been enormously improved by lay users.

    Now tell me, is it scientific to be defensive about one's profession or is that human?

    I'm not sure what you are going at with that attack on the profession. Everyone has quirks. A common problem in engineering is that many engineers do lack some hands on experience.

    I don't ask you to like those in my profession, but you should respect it if you care about aviation. I know that I will feel a sense of accomplishment when I see the first 787. I know that although very small and hardly noticeable for anyone but experts in specific areas, some of my measurements, tolerances that I decided on and dimensions that I worked on for parts will be on that plane and are necessary for the 787 to fly. You may not like my judgement and be quick to point out an error, but that I don't feel careless mistakes in a meaningless environment like Airliners.net should have any impact on what I have done in my professional life.
    If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
     
    SlamClick
    Posts: 9576
    Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2003 7:09 am

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Fri Jan 26, 2007 6:39 am

    Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 35):
    that attack on the profession.

    What attack!

    Dude! In all seriousness, what attack?

    This entire thread exists to poke fun at engineers and you single me out and call something (which you did not specifically identify) as an attack. Jesus man, there are hundreds, maybe thousands of posts here calling pilots the last safety problem left to be solved in air transport and I'm not complaining about that.

    Have you taken care to separate the things I've said to you from the things I've said to TZTriStar500? Are you sure you know which of you I was responding to?

    You did not know a teaspoon was an actual quantity and I cleared that up.
    You acknowledged my clarification. That was pretty much the end of that.

    Then...

    TZTriStar500 denied that a "teaspoon" is a finite measurement.

    I addressed that to him. I cited our exchange as part of the discussion.

    So, all that said; I respect what engineers do and I either like or dislike them according to my experience with the individual just like we all do. But I have to ask: Is it somehow disrespectful to correct an engineer's data?

    Straight ahead question, no hidden political agenda. Is it somehow disrespectful to correct an engineer's data?
    Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
     
    pygmalion
    Posts: 837
    Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 12:47 am

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Fri Jan 26, 2007 8:17 am

    Hello,

    My name is Jeff and I am an engineer.


    "Hi Jeff"

    Like most of you I suffer from EPD. Yes, Engineering Personality Disorder. While most of the world will cringe in horror at the accident, I will be noticing the interesting way the axle fractured and determining the best way to redesign it. I will fail to notice the SO's new hair style but I will take the car apart attempting to fix the faint rattle in the door until I trace it to the mirror cable chafing on the door grommet. I shake my fist at the lack of precision of the thermometer setting on most ovens.

    Have pity.
     
    User avatar
    TZTriStar500
    Posts: 891
    Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2004 1:33 am

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Fri Jan 26, 2007 12:27 pm

    Quoting SlamClick (Reply 31):
    Oh, I wouldn't say I "dislike" them. I have any number of engineer friends. I nearly married an engineer. That doesn't mean I can't be amused or even annoyed by a particular personality quirk common to engineers. You know the one - it is the entire subject of this thread.

    Your comments about engineers in general tend to come across as condescending which perhaps is not your intention. However, I will say that I can also be annoyed by certain personality quirks common to pilots.

    Quoting SlamClick (Reply 31):
    Sorry. Am I supposed to stand in such awe of their education that I can let an error in their data stand unchallenged?

    Of course not, but its no cake(or should I say cookie) walk to get that degree. We bust our asses to be able to call ourselves engineers, but by no means does that mean we are always right. Not that you are doing this here, but I am sensitive to situations when the importance of engineers and engineering is minimalized and that being detailed-oriented and precise really do not matter.

    Quoting SlamClick (Reply 31):
    I believe it is a common complaint, and not entirely unfounded, that engineers could benefit from additional "real world" experience. There are a few products, designed by engineers which have been enormously improved by lay users.

    No doubt about that. I am one that has never been afraid to get my hands dirty, turn my own wrenches on occassion, and solicit ideas from mechanics.

    Quoting SlamClick (Reply 36):
    Straight ahead question, no hidden political agenda. Is it somehow disrespectful to correct an engineer's data?

    No, not if the standards used are wrong, but one also has to know where some data comes from or how it is derived. Some aspects of engineering in supporting an aircraft, like structural analysis of modifications and repairs, are far from precise and subject to conditions, methods, and assumptions used simply in order to achieve a positive margin of safety. In other words, it may not be optimal, but it works and meets the FARs. Only new designs can afford to be more precise, but even then, this also uses material strength data that is derived from testing and assumptions.
    35 years of American Trans Air/ATA Airlines, 1973-2008. A great little airline that will not be soon forgotten.
     
    SlamClick
    Posts: 9576
    Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2003 7:09 am

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Fri Jan 26, 2007 12:59 pm

    Quoting TZTriStar500 (Reply 38):
    its no cake(or should I say cookie) walk to get that degree

    I have no doubt whatever about this. Anyone who has walked that walk is, indeed worthy of respect for the achievement.

    which leads me to

    Quoting TZTriStar500 (Reply 38):
    I am sensitive to situations when the importance of engineers and engineering is minimalized

    It is probably wise to acknowledge excellence in any profession and serious avocation including the culinary arts.
    Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
     
    Buzz
    Posts: 694
    Joined: Sun Nov 21, 1999 11:44 pm

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Sat Jan 27, 2007 10:44 pm

    Hi All, Buzz here. One of the more favorite sound clips is from the brief "Dilbert" cartoon.
    There is a doctor explaining a "birth defect" to the mother of an infant.
    "Your son has 'The Knack', it's a rare condition charactarized by extreme intuition of all things mechanical and electrical. And it also causes utter social incompetence"
    The mother: "Can he lead a normal life??"
    Doctor: "No. He'll be an engineer".
     
    amtrosie
    Posts: 273
    Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 6:44 am

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Tue Jan 30, 2007 7:30 am

    Slam,

    I took in the spirit it was rendered!!!!

    The rest of you, this is an attempt at humor. Recognize it, applaud the effort, remember the sintex. Take notes, so as to be able to replicate.
    Now, off to calibrate my utensils to the National Standards Lab in Colorado. Damn, that Kelvin-Celcious conversion!!!
     
    psyops
    Posts: 319
    Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 3:37 am

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Tue Jan 30, 2007 10:21 am

    Q. What is the difference between a dead skunk in the middle of the road, and a dead engineer in the middle of the road?

    A. There are skid marks in front of the skunk.

    Pete
     
    3DPlanes
    Posts: 167
    Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 11:12 pm

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Tue Jan 30, 2007 11:36 am

    Along these lines, I recall a paper going around that was like the "You might be a redneck..." lines.

    One that I recall in particular:

    If you've ever assumed a horse was a sphere, just to make the math easier - you might be a physics student.

    Maybe not directly aimed at engineers, but unless the reqs have changed, you'll have had any number of physics classes somewhere along the way.
    "Simplicate and add lightness." - Ed Heinemann
     
    ContnlEliteCMH
    Posts: 1391
    Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 8:19 am

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Wed Jan 31, 2007 12:23 pm

    Jeez guys. Lighten up. I wonder how many of my fellow engineers roll their eyes everytime some pop musician says something like "I just wanted to create something that sounds timeless"? Or the actor who thinks anybody really cares what they think about AIDS in Africa?

    Don't we despise those people *because* they take themselves too seriously and we know there's no intellectual rigor in their craft?

    If so, it's a bit disingenuous to be riled at the needling from another professional. You finished the coursework; you passed the exams; you walked to the podium to receive your diploma. Is your skin so thin as to bleed at a mere prick? Or do you just take yourself and your degree too seriously?

    Besides, Slam's RIGHT. As in, "got the correct answer", a state prized by all engineers.
    Christianity. Islam. Hinduism. Anthropogenic Global Warming. All are matters of faith!
     
    RIHNOSAUR
    Posts: 336
    Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2006 5:05 pm

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Sun Feb 11, 2007 12:54 pm

    Quoting 777236ER (Reply 20):
    Mathematician: 3 is a prime, 5 is a prime, 7 is a prime, and by induction - every odd integer higher than 2 is a prime.
    Physicist: 3 is a prime, 5 is a prime, 7 is a prime, 9 is an experimental error, 11 is a prime. Just to be sure, try several randomly chosen numbers: 17 is a prime, 23 is a prime...
    Engineer: 3 is a prime, 5 is a prime, 7 is a prime, 9 is an approximation to a prime, 11 is a prime,...
    Programmer (reading the output on the screen): 3 is a prime, 3 is a prime, 3 a is prime, 3 is a prime....
    Biologist: 3 is a prime, 5 is a prime, 7 is a prime, 9 -- results have not arrived yet,...
    Psychologist: 3 is a prime, 5 is a prime, 7 is a prime, 9 is a prime but tries to suppress it,...
    Chemist (or Dan Quayle): What's a prime?
    Politician: "Some numbers are prime.. but the goal is to create a kinder, gentler society where all numbers are prime... "

    very funny

    Quoting Lehpron (Reply 21):
    I was looking for a frequency or wavelength of color, so my question has not been answered yet. Smile

    well let me assure ya that you just wont be able to get a single color out a cookie...(the closest thing to a single color in practical terms is found in some of the worlds narrowest lines lasers)

    however a better question is what is the emission spectra of the cookie...I guess as a physics guy myself I would say...just model it using Black body radiation.(very rough approximation) ...at least the chocolate chips would be (to first order) like this

    ..ahhh.... memories of thermodynamics and statistical mechanics...

    cheers.
    particles and waves are the same thing, but who knows what that thing is...
     
    RIHNOSAUR
    Posts: 336
    Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2006 5:05 pm

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Sun Feb 11, 2007 1:01 pm

    Quoting Jerald01 (Reply 26):
    While bombardment of the mass by freed electrons may produce the required exothermic reaction

    what..?????


    Are you using an electron beam..i.e beta radiation bombardment on the cookies....

    cool....radioactive cookies!!!

    jejejeje
    particles and waves are the same thing, but who knows what that thing is...
     
    mohunk
    Posts: 26
    Joined: Sun May 06, 2007 5:12 am

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Tue Jul 17, 2007 10:18 am

    Quoting Psyops (Reply 42):
    Q. What is the difference between a dead skunk in the middle of the road, and a dead engineer in the middle of the road?

    A. There are skid marks in front of the skunk.

    That's all wrong, it's a dead skunk and a dead lawyer in the road (maybe you don't have lawyer troubles in Canda as we do in the U.S., EH?).

    Anyway, with all you engineers, I was a civil in my former life, and recall that you aeronautical guys developed a means of structural analysis called the finite element method (cut up a curved surface into many small triangles attached only at their points, analyze each triangle, and sum the result--all done obviously on a computer. The greater the curvature, the smaller the triangles). We used it to make curved surfaces such as roofs that the architects would design (sigh) stand up. Is this still used in aeronautical engineering, if not, what is--modelling?
     
    BAE146QT
    Posts: 981
    Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 4:58 am

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Thu Jul 19, 2007 2:26 am

    I realise that this is a resurrected thread, but I just want to comment on this;

    Quoting SlamClick (Reply 34):
    When expanding a recipe you don't think Campbell's Soup picks up a spoon out of the drawer and measures 66,000 individual portions of dessicated chicken stock into the vat do you?

    If they did, it would have to rank as the second most tedious and excruciating job in Christendom.

    Quoting Mohunk (Reply 47):
    Is this still used in aeronautical engineering, if not, what is--modelling?

    Even tinier triangles? My experience in CAD is that computers don't like dealing (directly) with curves, but they're quite happy to churn out triangles all day long. More processing power means you can make more triangles. Which means you can make more of them over the same area to get a higher resolution.

    Obviously I'm not an aircraft designer so I have no hands-on experience of what they use, but that's pretty much what is done in other modelling areas.

    Incidentally, forget computers for a minute. Concorde. A-12/SR-71. Two words - slide rule.

    We're losing something as a species, here.
    Todos mis dominós son totalmente pegajosos
     
    User avatar
    Jetlagged
    Posts: 2564
    Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 3:00 pm

    RE: Why Engineers Dont Bake Cookies

    Sat Jul 21, 2007 2:01 am

    Quoting SlamClick (Reply 31):
    I believe it is a common complaint, and not entirely unfounded, that engineers could benefit from additional "real world" experience. There are a few products, designed by engineers which have been enormously improved by lay users.

    Most engineers have plenty of real world experience, all worthwhile engineering degree courses provide that. I'd be very suspicious of an engineer with a purely theoretical education. It's usually scientists and mathematicians who need to get out more.  Smile

    Certainly lay people can improve on things, but their suggestions still have to be implemented by engineers, if only for safety.
    The glass isn't half empty, or half full, it's twice as big as it needs to be.

    Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: flight152 and 15 guests

    Popular Searches On Airliners.net

    Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

    Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

    Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

    Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

    Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

    Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

    Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

    Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

    Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

    Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

    Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

    Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

    Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

    Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

    Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos