Regarding the steak, the comparison made for steaks are often medium heat, pan cooked steaks. In that case the heat differential is high enough that it doesn't have time to somewhat equalize through the meat, but it is also low enough that it takes so long that you do end up with those really large layers. By quick searing at a high heat, and then cooking at a low heat, this layer is much smaller. Although personally I greatly prefer to have some of this layer (the disparity of textures is a big feature of it). Some people suggest doing the high heat searing on a frozen steak, of all things, and then moving to the over, but that's just unnecessary extra work in my opinion.
I appreciate where people want to pursue the science of food, but honestly it does very much seem like the nosql thing all over again -- skipping knowledge one doesn't have to do something perceived to be better.
Boiling water is 100 degrees Celsius and egg-white denatures at what, 40-45C? So your eggs will overcook, the sous-vide ones won't.
This, along with the comments about cooking a steak (where you are simply wrong), seem to assume that when you put a cooler item in a hotter substance, boom, it's the temperature of the hotter substance. It turns out that reality doesn't quite work this way.
An egg, for instance, happens to not only have an insulative shell, it's a liquid with a very high level of heat conductivity. When you put an egg in boiling water, the inside heats at a relatively uniform rate, which is exactly how we have concepts like the 6 minute egg. It incidentally turns out that the yolk sets at a higher temperature than the whites, which is how people who want firm whites and a liquidy yolk can achieve their goals, traditionally by timing (boiling water at a given altitude is fairly consistent).
The similar concept applies to the steak. A quick sear at high heat (500F+) does almost nothing to cook the inside of the steak -- the heat differential is far too high for it to migrate far through the thick protein layers, but when put in the 200F oven the differential is so low that in that case it does have time to essentially "even out" slowly. You sear first primarily because a room temperature, salted steak sears far better and more quickly than a heated, steaming piece of meat.
No, you don't wait until the item is 200F. That is absurdity. Personally I use a remote meat thermometer but other people simply go by wisdom and time. Any notion that I have to have the external temperature match what I want the internal temperature to be is...well...it's just scientifically ignorant.
Exactly as you said, it is all science and chemistry. And you seem to be coming at this as if the steak is a piece of copper. Indeed, I think this whole "cooking better" infatuation of the tech community is an attempt to (much like with NoSQL and a desire not to bother with that old DB knowledge) essentially try to skip the whole learning the basics thing, and then to paradoxically try to pretend that one's knowledge is a step above. I've seen several comically wrong comments along this line now.
Recall that you were the one who first said that I am an "enemy of quality". Somehow on HN your smiley-disclaimed trolls -- posts that are almost always the "enemy of quality" -- get a pass. So yes, accept it as some aggression: When you dare pass judgment on my opinions in such a vapid, haughty way, expect a negative response.
A "six minute egg" has been a benchmark for literally centuries. Apologies if there is confusion, but when I say "hard boiled", I mean all doneness levels of boiled eggs.
As I addressed in the other comment, yes, indeed, this is a technique built for traffic spikes. It is not a technique made for cooking breakfast.
As to steak, just to be clear (since there seems to be a lot of misinformation in here), the best New York City steakhouses grill steaks in a 1800 degree broiler. This is a heat that is difficult to obtain at home, so the sear+oven actually yields a wonderful, very uniform doneness. I suspect you've never tried it, have zero experience with it, but nonetheless pass judgment on it? Why is that?
As someone who has eaten the most expensive steaks, at the most expensive steak houses in the world, I think it's quite fantastic. I guess I defer to your judgment though?
this is about precise cooking, which yields very specific results
This is exactly what I'm talking about when I mention people intentionally making simple things difficult. Do you think someone, somewhere was sitting eating a hard (or soft, or variations thereof. Apologies if there was confusion on this) boiled egg and thought "Boy, this really is terrible. I sure wish it was..."? Do you think that was what yielded the invention of sous vide cooking? Are hard boiled eggs a current culinary problem?
No, they aren't. The argument borders on comical. Adding a "Duh!" to denigrate the notion that this is ridiculous easy doesn't prove your point. Further the steaks look absolutely vile (they look like texture monotony, which generally isn't a good result).
Sous vide came about in high volume kitchens. It wasn't because it yielded better results, but because it allowed for in-advance preparation, allowing the kitchen to toss little salmon meal baggies in hot water on spikes in orders, versus preparing it from scratch. It was a "traffic smoothing" technique, not an exercise for better results. In the classic "copy the chef" exercise, people emulated something for all the wrong reasons.
For the maillard reaction, obviously. I assume you were hoping I say something asinine like "sealing in the juices", to which you could tut tut, but sorry, searing has a very important culinary taste purpose.
It is somewhat fascinating how much the tech community seems to strive to try to solve non-problems. In this case, poaching or hard boiling an egg is so utterly simple, done in mere minutes, that it is simply impossible that this device could make it easier. And the grotesque proposed waste of energy borders on the absurd.
And then, after you've had your perfectly cooked eggs that you presumably had to hop out of bed and rush to retrieve before they overcooked, in your busy morning you're going to vacuum pack a steak? Seriously?
Or you can turn your oven to 200F. Toss a cast iron pan on your grilltop and sear at high heat, then move the whole thing to the oven. You'll quickly have a perfect steak without blowtorches or extended water bath time.
As with the soylent thing, it's like basic skills are now lacking so people looking for a lot of menial work to replace trivial undertakings.
>My current sense is that about 1% of the negatively scored comments don't deserve it.
There is a profoundly strong confirmation bias going on in this whole thread. Not only from you and the other mods (have comments gotten better? Comments, in my opinion, have gotten significantly worse. Yes, they're "nice", but more often than not of absolutely zero information or value), but much of the feedback you get whenever you post is of the pandering, supportive, back-patting sort. Because really, what is the alternative? The likely hellbanning or slowbanning that is so often the resort of HN?
For years the same "we're tuning algorithms" argument has been plied on HN. It is transparent, and I'm surprised anyone actually still buys that.
Regarding the steak, the comparison made for steaks are often medium heat, pan cooked steaks. In that case the heat differential is high enough that it doesn't have time to somewhat equalize through the meat, but it is also low enough that it takes so long that you do end up with those really large layers. By quick searing at a high heat, and then cooking at a low heat, this layer is much smaller. Although personally I greatly prefer to have some of this layer (the disparity of textures is a big feature of it). Some people suggest doing the high heat searing on a frozen steak, of all things, and then moving to the over, but that's just unnecessary extra work in my opinion.
I appreciate where people want to pursue the science of food, but honestly it does very much seem like the nosql thing all over again -- skipping knowledge one doesn't have to do something perceived to be better.