Slashdot Mirror
Scientists Solve Riddle of Unpopped Popcorn
Kozar_The_Malignant writes "CNN is reporting that scientists have solved the problem of unpopped popcorn kernels left in a bag or bowl. The short answer is that unpopped kernels have leaky hulls (seed coats) that prevent the buildup of sufficient pressure to cause the pop. The research has been published online and will appear in the July 11 edition of the journal BioMacromolecules. From the article: 'In the varieties popped, the percentage of unpopped kernels ranged from 4 percent in premium brands to 47 percent in the cheaper ones.' So buying the good stuff for home use is probably worth it."
Not necessarily true. The quality of kernels is of minor concern, major concern is time to market and freshness. Keep your unpopped corn in a sealed container to maintain humidity level and keep it fron drying out. Microwave popcorns aren't all going to be equal, either, as the oil/salt compositions will vary which affect the hulls of kernels. I've found microwave popcorn has a very short shelflife compared to plain kernel corn. Freshly opened popcorn has fewer 'widows and orphans' than older corn, especially corn which has been left exposed to air.
Like all things, popcorn engineered to look better or pop better in a microwave isn't necessarily your best tasting corn, either. I only buy microwave corn when I feel I need some for within the next few days and usually not just for myself. If eating popcorn at home I'm more likely to air pop some good stuff and put on real butter and use actual popcorn salt (not that table salt which is appearing in cheaper theaters everywhere.)
I don't have a paper on this anywhere, but I have had considerable experience popping corn, particularly in college where it helped absorb lots of beer. Naturally popcorn which comes in jars is going to fare better than that in plastic bags, but how old the kernels are is the most decisive factor and a higher end popcorn distributor is more likely to have better packaging. A more porous hull is likely to dry out faster or be weakened by contact with hydrogenated oils in any case. Your 4% to 47% is most likely attributable to quality of packaging, how long the product took to get to market and how long it stayed on the shelf (including shelf time at home.) Granted, better advertised brands are more likely to move through distribution and stores than generic brands, which may give it some edge.
What's more near and dear to my heart, when I shell several zorkmids at the bijou for my greasy paper bag is what the fsck they're putting on the corn. Most of those butter replacements are horrible and concession stands should be required to post a warning that their 'Butter' isn't butter at all but a blended gookum of vegetable oils. There's only one theater left in my area which still uses genuine butter.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
...and ignore the unpopped kernels. Probably be cheaper.
Real reason to get better quality is it tastes better.
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
That's odd, I read that exact explanation on wikipedia (why I was looking up popcorn, I do not recall) about 2 weeks ago. Go CNN and their speedy reporters!
all I can say is that's some expensive popcorn
There are no atheists when recovering from tape backup.
Makes great packing material, as long is it's air popped!
This was one of the original uses for popcorn, before styrofoam peanuts. My father, who worked at Oakridge on the Manhattan Project told me how they'd receive delicate instruments, packed in boxes of the stuff.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
As mentioned, plain kernel corn lasts quite a while on the shelf, if properly stored. With an air popper, I usually get about 3-4 bad-popped kernels, but even they usually have opened up a little. I use the cheapest brand kernels I can buy.
The best part is the cost. The microwave popcorn with 6 3.5oz bags in it costs the same as a 4lb bag of plain kernels. Also, I can spend my money on better-tasting butters specially designed for popcorn.
So with an air popper, I get fewer bad kernels, just over three times the amount of corn, and I can control the salt and butter amounts.
I don't understand why people use microwaves rather than a cheap air popper.
frob
//TODO: Think of witty sig statement
Is there a formal designation for the type of argument which asserts the undesirability of a given course of action on the basis of its consumption of effort/resources from an imagined "total pool of potential expended effort/resources," as it were?
It seems that there should be one. I encounter it rather often. I'm sure someone's attributed a name to it.
For example, as an argument against animal rights: "How can you spend all your time worrying about how the animals are doing, when there are children starving to death in Africa and homeless people dying on the street?
It's very common as a popular attack on perceived productive courses of action or topics of discourse and there's really no substance to the argument beyond the basic notion that any action aside from one which achieves maximum utilitarian gain is morally defective.
An hot air popper I paid $3 for at a flea market leaves at most a couple kernels unpopped from enough corn I put in to make about five liters of popcorn. These never burn popcorn either, since once a kernel pops, it is blown away from the hottest bottom of the machine by the airflow. However leaky kernels are, usually the heat at the bottom will generate pressure faster than can be relieved -- the machine can reach very high temperatures, as I know since I use it to roast coffee beans as well.
"Politicians and diapers must be changed often, and for the same reason."
No, it's not urban legend. Well, perhaps back in the Los Alamo days. I was but a mere tad in those days... But a few years ago (10? 15?) our orders for computer equipment began arriving packed in real popcorn instead of those nasty little styrofoam peanuts that seem to cling to everything. I thought (and so did the environmentalists) that it was a GREAT step forward. We even used to eat the stuff, with some trepidation. But they stopped using it as a packing material, because, as you remarked, vermin were chowing down on the stuff, and the packers had the choice of either spraying it with noxious pesticides and incurring the wrath of next-of-kin of inner city victims (and perhaps us), or going back to the styrofoam things. They reluctantly chose the latter. God, I hate those white peanuts!!
.
- aqk
F U
Way back in the Day Kaypro had the coolest packing system for there computers.
They had a box with these plastic corners with what looked like three whiffle balls on them. THen that was packed in a bigger box.
The whiffle like balls acted as shock absorbers.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.