this post was submitted on 13 May 2025
66 points (95.8% liked)

Asklemmy

48015 readers
896 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I'm sick of having to look up what country an author is from to know which variant of teaspoon they're using or how big their lemons are compared to mine. It's amateur hour out there, I want those homely family recipes up to standard!

What are some good lessons from scientific documentation which should be encouraged in cooking recipes? What are some issues with recipes you've seen which have tripped you up?

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

A German cookbook that I have first introduced me to the hub and spoke method of recipes. As in, it provided a base recipe at its most simplistic fashion, and then after that recipe, it listed ways you could modify that recipe for different kinds of dishes. Essentially listing points in the original where you could modify it in specific ways.

And this was no modern cookbook. It was printed back in the 60s.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 9 hours ago

I think a major one is to try to avoid trusting in unfounded precision.

If you want to make lemonade like a chemist, you don't just weigh out some lemon juice and add it to water and sugar. You measure sugar and citric acid content of the batch of lemon juice, then calculate how much water will dilute it to the right pH, and how much sugar will bring it to your desired osmolarity. In reality, no one is going to do that unless they run a business and need a completely repeatable. If you get lazy and just weigh out the same mass of stuff with a new batch of lemon juice, you could be way off. Better to just make it and taste it then adjust. Fruits, vegetables, and meats are not consistent products, so you can't treat them as such.

If i were to be writing recipes for cooking, I would have fruits/vegetables/meats/eggs listed by quantity, not mass (e.g., 1 onion, 1 egg), but i would include a rough mass to account for regional variations in size (maybe your carrots are twice the size of mine). Spices i would not give amounts for because they are always to taste. At most, I would give ratios (e.g. 50% thyme, 25% oregano). Lots of people have old, preground spices, so they will need to use much more than someone using whole spices freshly ground. I think salt could be given as a percentage of total mass of other ingredients, but desired salinity is a wide range, so i would have to aim low and let people adjust upward.

Baking is a little different, and I really like cookbooks that use bakers percentages, however, they don't work well for ingredients like egg that I would want to use in discrete increments. For anything with flour, I would specify brand and/or protein level. A European trying to follow an American bread recipe will likely end up disappointed because European flour usually has lower protein (growing conditions are different), which will result in different outcomes.

I will say in defense of teaspoons, most home cooks have scales that have a 1 gram resolution, though accuracy is questionable if you are only measuring a few grams or less. Teaspoons (and their smaller fractions) are going to be more accurate for those ingredients. Personally, I just have a second, smaller scale with greater resolution.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (1 children)

I just want cups gone for solids (and viscous stuff). It’s such an idiotic system. 1 cup of diced carrot … wtf how should I go about measuring that in the grocery store? Just tell me 1 large carrot or by weight.

I know it doesn’t need to be exact but it just doesn’t make sense to do it this way. Even with imperial units, you have ounces, why not use that?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (2 children)

Ounces suck because they are used as a weight and a volume, and I can't ever be sure which one a particular recipe is using.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

And there are Florida ounces, which as a Canadian confuses me to no end.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 hours ago

Damn, the imperial system really is messed up…

[–] [email protected] 8 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Food science is truly complex, so in order to accurately replicate a recipe, you need to standardize pretty much everything. Currently, there’s plenty of variation and you just compensate by winging it and keeping an eye on the pot a little longer.

In order to reduce variation, we need to standardize the following:

  • ingredients: The composition of meat and carrots varies a lot.
  • heating methods: An oven set to 200 °C is not exactly 200 ° at every location and all the time.
  • weigh everything: Volumes are complicated and messy.
  • use a timer: This applies to all actions like stirring, heating etc.

All materials and methods should be accurately documented, because things like the coating or weight of your pan can introduce unwanted variability.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 hours ago

Diameter of pots is big, too. You get way more evaporation with a wider pot.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

You should check out the super old website called "cooking for engineers".

[–] [email protected] 2 points 18 hours ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 14 hours ago
[–] [email protected] 7 points 22 hours ago

I'm an American biochemist, I also never learned the english system because my school transitioned to metric too fast. The mental burden of trying to cook using english units after working all day in the lab using that same part of my brain leads me to just not want to cook 95% of the time. But when I do cook I have optimized processes for my few simple recipes. When I bake I usually use a metric recipe or convert a English one, and optimize it before making a large batch of something.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I was a professional chemist for around ~7 and love to cook. My suggestion is to stop expecting precision with an imprecise and natural product like cooking. Are your lemons larger? They also might be sweeter, tarter, juicer etc. than others. Same thing with teaspoons. The spices you are using may be more or less concentrated than who wrote it.

Lean into the uncertainty and be free. Double or even triple spices to see if you like it. Measure with your heart

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

That’s just people who know how to cook, beginners want to follow recipes to a T and almost always come up with sub par results to someone who knows how to cook because they already incorporate what you’ve mentioned. This is just “make sure people cooking know how to cook” lol

[–] [email protected] 9 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

I was thinking saying that expecting precision from a natural product is a fools errand. So embrace the imperfection and go crazy

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Yep. imperfection is a feature not a bug.

Trying to eliminate every variable and be able to follow a precise formula is absurd. And if you manage to do that you are going to make food that is as good as what you can buy in the frozen section of any grocery store. That highly processed stuff is made by eliminating all the variables and following a precise formula.

Just enjoy the variation, taste your ingredients and food at every step you can and adjust until you like it.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 hours ago

There are science behind cooking but its mostly with methods instead of inputs. If anyone is interested [Salt Fat Acid Heat](https://www.saltfatacidheat.com/] and (The Food Lab)[https://www.amazon.com/Food-Lab-Cooking-Through-Science/dp/0393081087] are more scientific about methods and made for home cooks. You can also look at On Food and Cooking which is much more textbook like about the science of cooking. Its there but not in standardized measurements and units for recipes

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 day ago

Cooking is not a standardized or reproducible process at home, because the variables outside of anybody's control. Modern mass recipes give only the illusion of being reproducible algorithms, but they will never achieve that.

Grappling with the complexity of different tooling, supply chains, seasonality and so on, all within a recipe, is a futile effort. That complexity must be handled outside the recipe.

[–] [email protected] 28 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Recipes should be written with the quantities in the procedure. So instead of reading

Mix flour, salt and sugar in a large mixing bowl

It should be

Mix flour (300g), salt (1/4 tsp), and sugar (20g) in a large mixing bowl

That way you don't need to read/refer to ingredient list, read/refer to ingredient list, etc

[–] [email protected] 7 points 18 hours ago

I really appreciate the recent trend of done cooking websites to do this on mouseover. Best of both worlds for readability and convenience. Not great when you're in the kitchen and not using a mouse, I'd hope a mobile or printable version just writes it out like you did there. Love Auto scaling recipes too where you can click to adjust number of servings, bonus points if they have some logic so they don't tell you to use .71 eggs or something.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

You should look for kitchen tested recipes.

load more comments
view more: next ›