Slashdot Mirror


The Science of Stout Beer

An AC writes "Mathematicians invented a new method to can and bottle stout beers like Guinness while still getting that satisfying head. From the article: '... a crack group of mathematicians from the University of Limerick, led by William Lee, has modeled bubble formation in stout beers in detail. Their work suggests that lining the rims of cans and bottles with a material similar to an ordinary coffee filter would be a simpler, cheaper alternative to the widget. The team’s calculations show that a copious number of bubbles would form from air trapped inside the hollow fibers making up this lining. They have just submitted their work for publication in Physical Review E and are hoping that industry will soon begin testing their proposal.'"

205 comments

  1. The science of better Guinness by Drakkenmensch · · Score: 2

    Now that's science I'll raise my drink to!

    1. Re:The science of better Guinness by c0mpliant · · Score: 1

      As an Irishman, I don't know how anyone can drink Guinness. I see tourists ordering it with their breakfast sometimes here (granted that will be a breakfast at 12 that looks more like a bucket of greese with a few sausages thrown in) and I feel like getting sick when I see it! Give me a Bulmers any day of the week and no one has formed a better way to store that than in a pint bottle.

      Good to see that University of Limerick students are hard at work though!

      --
      There is no -1 disagree
    2. Re:The science of better Guinness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Guinness is ok if you like your beer watered down.

    3. Re:The science of better Guinness by destroygbiv · · Score: 1

      Who isn't Irish? Guiness is good. Hell, beer is good. They're all good! (Except Leffe..)

    4. Re:The science of better Guinness by khr · · Score: 2

      As an Irishman, I don't know how anyone can drink Guinness.

      Though a non Irishman (never mind my Irish first name or my high school sports team being the Waldport Irish) I agree... Guiness is close to one of my last choices in stouts... My preference runs towards some of the Portland, Oregon microbrewery stouts, especially the cask conditioned ones...

    5. Re:The science of better Guinness by DrgnDancer · · Score: 2

      Meh, It's not a bad stout. There are better, in Ireland, England, or the States (probably other places too, but those are the ones I've had stout in ), but it's got the advantage of being both fairly decent and readily available in a lot of places. In the US particularly it's a very common "nod" to better quality beer in places that otherwise have only crap. It and Sam Adams Lager are two beers that one can often find in places that otherwise only serve Budweiser and Miller Macro brew stuff. If I'm in a place that has lots of good beer, Guinness falls pretty low on my list (though its low alcohol content can make it a better choice later in the evening), but if I'm with friends at a less choosy sports bar or something It's often a nice choice.

      --
      I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.
    6. Re:The science of better Guinness by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      As an Irishman, I don't know how anyone can drink Guinness. I see tourists ordering it with their breakfast sometimes here (granted that will be a breakfast at 12 that looks more like a bucket of greese with a few sausages thrown in) and I feel like getting sick when I see it! Give me a Bulmers any day of the week and no one has formed a better way to store that than in a pint bottle.

      Well, if tourists..especially Americans...that is about the only Irish beer they know. I mean, in mainstream US, mexican beer is Corona (thankfully changing a bit), and Irish beer is Guiness, Australian beer is Fosters. That's the only taste of it most people get over here.

      The scene is changing a bit...many brew pubs and bars specializing in beers are offering other choices, but even then, often small brew US beers are dominating those taps, and with decent reason too..they are local and they are GOOD. Down here in New Orleans, we have a number of local breweries that are putting out some quality beer.

      That being said...as a tourist when I'm visiting other countries (less and less these days)...I do try to ask the locals what they prefer and what is good to drink. I find it is a great way to learn, and an easy way to strike up a conversation with the locals and make new friends and find out where to go off the beaten path for restaurants, etc.

      Sadly, many of my fellow countrymen travel and stick with fscking McD's or the like...but not me. When in Rome as they say....

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    7. Re:The science of better Guinness by Osgeld · · Score: 1

      agreed, its not even on my list of choices, but really? tourists ordering Guinness in ireland? thats like going to Italy and ordering Papa Johns pizza

    8. Re:The science of better Guinness by Brewmeister_Z · · Score: 1

      If Guiness is watered down to you, I would like to hear your opinion of American light beers. Seems like the brewers here are on a race to the bottom by offering beers with less in them. I can hardly wait for Miller to make a beer from the water they use to rinse out their brewing equipment (maybe that is what they serve up now for the low-calorie swill?). Zero-calorie beer will the next abomination (AKA bottled water with a hint of yellow color at twice the price of other overpriced bottled water).

      --
      I Cater to the Needs of Stupid People. - from a coffee mug Christmas gift
    9. Re:The science of better Guinness by alvinrod · · Score: 1

      As an Irishman, I don't know how anyone can drink Guinness.

      Too light for you? Just because you Irish drink like you're— well, Irish, doesn't mean you have to Harp on the rest of us.

      ;)

    10. Re:The science of better Guinness by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 1

      Leffe is good, but Nigerian Guiness is the best!

      --
      Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
    11. Re:The science of better Guinness by harl · · Score: 1

      I don't understand. As an Irishman you are somehow able to tell everyone what is good and what is bad?

      Seriously you're judging what other people enjoy? What gives you the right?

      --
      I find being offended by me offensive.
    12. Re:The science of better Guinness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Student's t-Distribution also arose from the scientific pursuit of better Guinness.

    13. Re:The science of better Guinness by WitnessForTheOffense · · Score: 1

      Analogy fail. Guinness is actually from Ireland. Papa Johns pizza isn't from Italy.

    14. Re:The science of better Guinness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If Guiness is watered down to you, I would like to hear your opinion of American light beers. Seems like the brewers here are on a race to the bottom by offering beers with less in them. I can hardly wait for Miller to make a beer from the water they use to rinse out their brewing equipment (maybe that is what they serve up now for the low-calorie swill?). Zero-calorie beer will the next abomination (AKA bottled water with a hint of yellow color at twice the price of other overpriced bottled water).

      Come to Oregon, where it's a race to the hop!

    15. Re:The science of better Guinness by _0xd0ad · · Score: 1

      I can hardly wait for Miller to make a beer from the water they use to rinse out their brewing equipment (maybe that is what they serve up now for the low-calorie swill?). Zero-calorie beer will the next abomination (AKA bottled water with a hint of yellow color at twice the price of other overpriced bottled water).

      As long as it still has alcohol in it, if it is cheaper I can almost guarantee college students will drink it.

    16. Re:The science of better Guinness by Osgeld · · Score: 1

      fine its mass produced crap you can get pretty much anywhere, I am not flying thousands of miles to get something that cost a few bucks across the street :p

    17. Re:The science of better Guinness by c0mpliant · · Score: 0

      Boom boom!!! :P

      --
      There is no -1 disagree
    18. Re:The science of better Guinness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds to me as if you just don't enjoy beer if you'd prefer a cidar to a pint of Guinness.

    19. Re:The science of better Guinness by kelemvor4 · · Score: 2

      Originally, perhaps. If you look at a recent bottle (at least the one I have here) it says it was brewed and bottled in Canada. Now days, Guinness = Canadian beer.

    20. Re:The science of better Guinness by c0mpliant · · Score: 1, Redundant

      I find you being offended by me offensive.

      --
      There is no -1 disagree
    21. Re:The science of better Guinness by destroygbiv · · Score: 1

      I've never tried Nigerian Guiness, but the Leffe we get up here in the exact middle of Canada tastes more like rotten fruit than beer.

    22. Re:The science of better Guinness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How do you think keystone and Natural light are made?

    23. Re:The science of better Guinness by amRadioHed · · Score: 2

      As an Irishman you should know what a beer is at least, why are you comparing Bulmers to Guinness? If I want a beer I would consider a Guinness but I sure as hell won't be ordering a cider!

      --
      We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
    24. Re:The science of better Guinness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, that's cool, but sometimes you'd be better off drinking stuff that is too expensive for the locals. I mean, there's beer here, but it's all horrible, and I'd never suggest it to anyone, even an Usian tourist. You'd be better off wasting your money on, say, the absolutely insane amount of Belgian beers available (at equally insane prices, but hey, you probably got that kind of money).

      Also, what's wrong with Corona? The only other Mexican beer I've tried was Negra Modelo, and that was also pretty good. Oh well, perhaps I've downed too much swill to know the difference between decent and really good.

    25. Re:The science of better Guinness by gregulator · · Score: 0

      To be fair, a Cadbury Egg McFlurry is a damn good reason to go into a British McDonalds.

    26. Re:The science of better Guinness by JacksonG · · Score: 1

      As a westcountryman I don't know how anyone can drink Bulmers - Give me a Thatchers and keep it coming!

      Definately agree with you on the storage in a pint bottle however.

      --
      I am not a Frog. I am a Free Womble!
    27. Re:The science of better Guinness by BagOCrap · · Score: 1

      As an Irishman, I don't know how anyone can drink Guinness. I see tourists ordering it with their breakfast sometimes here (granted that will be a breakfast at 12 that looks more like a bucket of greese with a few sausages thrown in) and I feel like getting sick when I see it! Give me a Bulmers any day of the week and no one has formed a better way to store that than in a pint bottle.

      Good to see that University of Limerick students are hard at work though!

      Quite correct, and agree wholeheartedly. Guinness is to dry stout as Erdinger is to hefeweizen as carrot is to a car. Or something like that. It's no longer a matter of quality, it's just a brand that's succumbed to its own commercial appeal.

      --
      -- Chaos, panic, pandemonium... My job here is done!
    28. Re:The science of better Guinness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Usian" is not a word. The demonym for the people who live in the United States is "American". Examples of the correct usage are "American tourists", "stupid Americans", etc. This is definitive information. Memorize it and begin using it immediately.

    29. Re:The science of better Guinness by c0mpliant · · Score: 1

      Not the stuff in Ireland, brewed at James Gate in Dublin. Still tastes like piss water to me, but yeah

      --
      There is no -1 disagree
    30. Re:The science of better Guinness by c0mpliant · · Score: 1

      I'm not a fan of beer in general. Hence Bulmers when I order

      --
      There is no -1 disagree
    31. Re:The science of better Guinness by oldmac31310 · · Score: 1

      You must be from Cork. Bulmers is for children. What is greese?

      --
      http://www.acetonestudio.com
    32. Re:The science of better Guinness by c0mpliant · · Score: 0

      Whatever you give me, give it to me in a pint bottle!

      --
      There is no -1 disagree
    33. Re:The science of better Guinness by b0bby · · Score: 1

      I don't really drink, but in Ireland I tried Guinness in both Galway & Dublin. Even I could tell that it was better in Dublin. They say it doesn't travel well, and from my limited experience I'd agree. So, from now on I only drink Guinness in Dublin.

    34. Re:The science of better Guinness by Silentknyght · · Score: 1

      Seconded. Guinness is the Budweiser of stouts. The US craft brewing and homebrewing scene can, and regularly does, do stout beer a lot better service.

    35. Re:The science of better Guinness by oldmac31310 · · Score: 1

      That is a really idiotic comment. I really don't even know what you are trying to express!

      --
      http://www.acetonestudio.com
    36. Re:The science of better Guinness by Nursie · · Score: 1

      It's not bad, a couple of bottles of that one knocK me for six though. Brewed to about 7 or 8% isn't it?

      There's also an export strength version from Dublin I'm quite partial too.

      "Foreign Extra" those are the words they use!

    37. Re:The science of better Guinness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You tell'em, Sparky!

    38. Re:The science of better Guinness by oldmac31310 · · Score: 1

      Actually, no it tastes quite different in different parts of the world. The best Guiness is found close to the James St. Brewery.

      --
      http://www.acetonestudio.com
    39. Re:The science of better Guinness by Purity+Of+Essence · · Score: 1

      Guinness isn't a traditional stout by any means, but it's a tasty beer nonetheless. It's very nearly my favorite beer, but as a stout it probably belongs near the end of the list, or on a list uniquely its own. It's funny that it has this reputation for being the be-all and end-all of stouts -- but then again this is a world where Budweiser is the King of Beers.

      --
      +0 Meh
    40. Re:The science of better Guinness by SockPuppetOfTheWeek · · Score: 2

      The country where greak food comes from, obviously.

    41. Re:The science of better Guinness by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      A coworker of mine took his kid on an ambulance ride because he passed out from alcohol poisoning. Idiot gave his kid Miller, said "this is beer, now you know, so you just sip on one can and nobody bothers you for not drinking" because it was shitty tasting.

      Predictable result. Kid hates alcohol, it tastes like shit. Kid gets around party zone, sees alcohol as a mere vehicle to get drunk, drinks a lot. We teach our kids in the US that alcohol is absolutely bad and should never be touched. Stupid.

      I told him he needs to teach that kid to drink. Get some $50 bottles of scottish islay whiskey, some good rum, and some Bass Pale Ale or Dogfish Head Shelter Pale Ale. Sit down one day and sip off an ounce of good whiskey... not the kind of shit you want to guzzle down hard and fast, because it's too good to waste. Beer is also very good, and you should expect to be served worthwhile beer.

      When someone hands you cheap vodka from a $20 1.5L bottle and you gag on it, you will know: this shit isn't worth drinking. Too much good whiskey or rum will leave you regarding getting drunk as an annoying side effect of taking too much good liquor at once. Same with beer: too much nasty alcohol, not enough good malty flavor, not drinking this shit.

    42. Re:The science of better Guinness by Osgeld · · Score: 1

      its mass produced garbage you can get anywhere, why go to Ireland and drink crap you can buy at the BP

    43. Re:The science of better Guinness by _0xd0ad · · Score: 1

      When someone hands you cheap vodka from a $20 1.5L bottle

      Who pays $20 for cheap vodka?!

    44. Re:The science of better Guinness by MrHanky · · Score: 1

      Well, there's the old myth of Guinness not tasting the quite right anywhere but Dublin. For all I know, it might be true, despite it all being brewed in Dublin and shipped around the world. Naturally, you'd want to taste the only beer Ireland is known for the way it's meant to be when you're visiting Ireland for the first time.

    45. Re:The science of better Guinness by Local+ID10T · · Score: 2

      As an Irishman you are somehow able to tell everyone what is good and what is bad?

      Yes, at least when it comes to beer and whiskey.

      --
      "You want to know how to help your kids? Leave them the fuck alone." -George Carlin
    46. Re:The science of better Guinness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some Stouts I don't consider watered down.

      Milk Stout: Left Hand Brewing company CO
      Jefferson Stout: Lazy Magnolia Brewing Company MS
      Moo Hoo Chocolate Milk Stout: Terrapin Brewing Company GA
      Any shout made by: Rogue OR
      Hitachino Nest Espresso Stout: Kiuchi Brewery Japan

    47. Re:The science of better Guinness by harl · · Score: 1

      That's nice. Are you going to address the point made?

      --
      I find being offended by me offensive.
    48. Re:The science of better Guinness by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      The taxes are $14/L for alcohol in the US I think. At 40%, 1.5L is $8.40 of taxes. Mind you, you're legally required to sell your liquor to a distributor, who sells it to the store, making mark-up at the brewer, distributor, and store level, so somewhere between $8.40 and $20 there's $12.60 of total mark-up, part of which pays for manufacturing, part of which pays for the bottle to put it in, part of which pays for shipping.

    49. Re:The science of better Guinness by _0xd0ad · · Score: 1

      The cheapest of the cheap vodka at Price Chopper is $10.49 per 1.5L. And it was on sale for under $10 a few weeks ago at the liquor store.

    50. Re:The science of better Guinness by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 1

      Originally, perhaps. If you look at a recent bottle (at least the one I have here) it says it was brewed and bottled in Canada. Now days, Guinness = Canadian beer.

      Same with many Japanese beers. The big print on a Sapporo or Asahi says "IMPORTED"; the small print says "from Canada". (Kirin doesn't even bother to pretend -- it's brewed by Anheuser-Busch.)

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    51. Re:The science of better Guinness by CraftyJack · · Score: 1

      It sounds bizarre, but Ireland is a beer desert. The selection usually consists of stout, lager, other lager, or tea. I think it has something to do with the way distribution works there. (That's still no reason to resort to looney juice - and stay away from the pear, of course.)

    52. Re:The science of better Guinness by pxpt · · Score: 1

      -- but then again this is a world where Budweiser is the King of Beers.

      LOL - how modest of them... The original Budweiser brewed in the Czeck Republic is a lot better. Pity they are forced to call themselves Budvar in some areas due to the American Budweiser and they are the original company!

      Personally, my favourite lager beer is Pilsner Urquell - now THAT is a decent lager beer not like that American ricey/maizey adulterated rubbish.

      For stouts I DO like a glass or two of Guinness but I liked that Scottish stout that you could get about 15 years ago. Such a wonderful smokey, peaty flavour that I kept on going back for more. I just wish I could remember what it was called...

    53. Re:The science of better Guinness by amRadioHed · · Score: 1

      Well there's the problem. You should have had a disclaimer. By stating you are an Irishman you imply that you are something of an expert on Irish beer, which you clearly can not be if you don't enjoy any beer at all.

      --
      We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
    54. Re:The science of better Guinness by joelleo · · Score: 1

      Originally, perhaps. If you look at a recent bottle (at least the one I have here) it says it was brewed and bottled in Canada. Now days, Guinness = Canadian beer.

      This is true for the normal Guinness Stout beer, including Foreign Extra. Guinness Draught is 100% brewed in Ireland though.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guinness_stout

      --
      "In the end, there is simply no weapon more devastating than the truth, delivered in just the right way." - tnk1
    55. Re:The science of better Guinness by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 0

      That's great but Bulmers is not a stout. So unless you have a stout option, its' not much of a comparison.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H._P._Bulmer

    56. Re:The science of better Guinness by c0mpliant · · Score: 1

      Not a fan of doesn't mean I've never had it or that I don't ever have it. Sometimes a pint of beer is better. But most of the time, when I have the choice, I'll have a cider

      --
      There is no -1 disagree
    57. Re:The science of better Guinness by GooberToo · · Score: 2, Informative

      This is very true.

      People love to make fun of American beers but in doing so completely expose their bias and/or general ignorance. The reality is, American beers actually re-invented beer making. The beer before the resurgence of beer making in America largely existed because their grandfather made beer and that was good enough. Whereas, American beer grew because people wanted something which tasted good. And beer sold based on that notion. Before such a market existed, people purchased beer because it was a necessity of life*.

      Of course, this doesn't mean all American beers are excellent or even good. Anyone whos had a variety of any country's beers will tell you otherwise; which isn't even account for individual differences in preferences. Just the same, if you want to drink a beer that largely drunk because your father's father drank it, drink something other than American beer. On the other hand, if you want to drink a beer which is around almost solely because it tastes good and is refreshing, give an American micro brew a chance.

      So ask yourself, are you drinking beer because someone's great, great grandfather liked it and you've trained your buds to believe that is what tastes good, or are you drinking it because it really tastes good to you? An exceedingly large number of beer snobs fall into the former category. Which IMOHO, completely undermines the entire basis of their snobbery.

      (*) Its important to remember, in times past, beer wasn't drank because it tasted good. Beer was largely consumed because it was safer (more pure, less contamination, fewer bugs, slightly pro-antibiotic) than water. Furthermore, for many people, it was a primary source of nutrition. As such, most really old beer recipes exist primarily for their shelve life and nutritional value with taste being a far second priority. This is, in fact, why many people went to work drunk, or at least diminished, and why coffee became a critical necessity of the industrial revolution. Those who didn't drink coffee to counter act the effects of high beer intake were far more likely to be maimed or killed.

    58. Re:The science of better Guinness by fotbr · · Score: 1

      Most people that I know of that make fun of "American beers" are making fun of the absolute shit carrying the budweiser, michelob, coors, etc "big" brands.

      As you say, there are plenty of American micro- and regional- breweries making great beer.

    59. Re:The science of better Guinness by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      I've never seen prices that low, ever.

    60. Re:The science of better Guinness by Threni · · Score: 1

      > As an Irishman, I don't know how anyone can drink Guinness..... Give me a Bulmers any day of the week

      And people say the Irish are stupid...

    61. Re:The science of better Guinness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seconded. Guinness is the Budweiser of stouts. The US craft brewing and homebrewing scene can, and regularly does, do stout beer a lot better service.

      Examples please!!!

    62. Re:The science of better Guinness by amRadioHed · · Score: 1

      I didn't say you've never had it, but as someone who is not a fan of beer your taste in beer obviously diverges from the tastes of those who are fans of beer.

      --
      We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
    63. Re:The science of better Guinness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And that's supposed to mean something, why?

    64. Re:The science of better Guinness by Quirkz · · Score: 1
      Those exist?! Mmmmm!

      Excuse me, I think I'm having a "it comes in pints?" Hobbit moment.

    65. Re:The science of better Guinness by plopez · · Score: 1

      I'm not Irish, but I agree. I hail from the "Napa Valley of beer" where the variety and quality of lagers, stouts, pilsners, pale ales, wheats, lambics, India pale ales, "reds", and more is hard to surpass. Mainstream beers don't do it for me. I used to drink Guinness, Harp, Heineken, etc. simply because it was better than the industrial junk. Now I can't stand them. When I can't get good beer I drink Pabst, the "Best of the Bad Beers".

      --
      putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
    66. Re:The science of better Guinness by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 1

      Amen, brother. I spent a full year trying to get the taste of Guinness and had to give it up in the end. Bulmers/Magners or Strongbow is pretty hard to beat, and cider is my drink of choice if I find myself in a round with beer drinkers. (I'm usually a cocktail man, but they're not practical when drinking in a group dominated by beer drinkers.)

      --
      Drill baby drill - on Mars
    67. Re:The science of better Guinness by vegiVamp · · Score: 2

      As a Belgian - yeah, we brew it - I have to say that I'm not particularly fond of Leffe, either; although I certainly wouldn't say it tastes like rotten fruit. Leffe, like most of the "premium belgian beers" you get on your side of the water, is an Inbev product, and it shows. These are the people who tried to move production of Hoegaarden from Hoegaarden to Jupille, found that you can't just move beer brewing around and expect to get the same results, got probably around three-quarters of all the batches brewed to be undrinkable to the point of simply pouring it away and in the process of trying to fill their pockets (sorry, I mean "optimising the potential synergies", of course) pretty much put half of belgium out of Hoegaarden for six months.

      Yeah, these people certainly know what brewing beer is all about.

      I can't think of a single Inbev beer that I'll voluntarily touch with a ten-foot pole. Hell, even Heineken has a handful of reasonable beers - but at least they're smart enough to leave the brewing to the brewers. Op-Ale is still made in Opwijk (as is Affligem, incidentally), and they've even got Mort Subite, a reasonably decent traditional gueuze.

      /beerrant

      --
      What a depressingly stupid machine.
    68. Re:The science of better Guinness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As an Irishman, I enjoy drinking Guinness. Then again, I enjoy most beers.
      Yes there are better stouts available, but it depends on the flavour you're looking for to match the mood of the time. Yes, water can do the trick some times.

    69. Re:The science of better Guinness by vegiVamp · · Score: 1

      > When in Rome as they say.... ... try the pickled kolibri tongues ?

      --
      What a depressingly stupid machine.
    70. Re:The science of better Guinness by Intrepid+imaginaut · · Score: 1

      Have you ever tried it in Ireland or the UK? Guinness travels really badly.

    71. Re:The science of better Guinness by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Obsidian Oatmeal Stout is my personal favorite when I'm in the mood for stout.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    72. Re:The science of better Guinness by russotto · · Score: 1

      As long as it still has alcohol in it, if it is cheaper I can almost guarantee college students will drink it.

      Alcohol has 7 calories per gram, so no significant alcohol in zero-calorie beer.

    73. Re:The science of better Guinness by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      What's wrong with Corona? If you even have to ask that question you should not comment about beer at all.

      Corona taste exactly like Miller High Life, it just costs twice as much. They are both piss.

      If you have to put lime in beer to make it not taste like piss it's bad beer.

      IMHO Dos Equies and Bohemia are about the only decent Mexican beers. There are no good Mexican beers, same as Canada.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    74. Re:The science of better Guinness by fatphil · · Score: 1

      Urquell?

      Which bit of Urquell do you think hasn't been owned by SABMiller since the 90s? And yes the beancounters that come with being part of the 2nd largest brewing company in the world do make them brew with adjuncts. Even in the 80s the quality wasn't so brilliant (they were a national brand run by beancounters), and they've steadily got worse since. It's mass market swill - you're fooling yourself if you think otherwise. However, there are hundreds of worse brands out there, don't get me wrong (anything in a clear bottle is a poorer quality brand than anything in a green bottle is a pretty good generalisation, but most things in green bottles are poor quality.)

      If you want to keep holding the Urquell brand in respect, go to the brewery tap, as you can still get the kvasnicovy, which is a very good beer, as it's brewed with care, in small quantities, aged correctly, and is unfiltered and pasteurised. Basically the exact opposite of the crap in the green glass bottle.

      --
      Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
    75. Re:The science of better Guinness by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Whiskey yes, but I challenge you to name a good Irish beer.

      There are none that ship outside Ireland that is for sure.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    76. Re:The science of better Guinness by Quirkz · · Score: 1

      While I accept your point, I strongly disagree with your suggested "tasty" drinks. Islay scotches and pale ales tend to be challenging drinks, and I'd suspect a lot of youngsters would choke on those more than a Miller. Personal tastes vary, of course, but if I was trying to introduce alcohol to a newbie, I'd start them with a sweet beer like a hefeweisen or kolsch, or a simpler scotch blend, long before I'd throw something hoppy or as pungent as an islay. More likely than that even is starting with a little wine, which at least has some resemblance to the child-friendly grape juice.

    77. Re:The science of better Guinness by GooberToo · · Score: 2, Informative

      Most people that I know of that make fun of "American beers" are making fun of the absolute shit carrying the budweiser, michelob, coors, etc "big" brands.

      But in doing so, they are exposing massive ignorance. The fact is, its far, far harder to control quality on lightly flavored beer than it is on rubusto, old world beers. This is something even Samuel Adams* is quick to point out. The fact is, when you have a light flavor, the smallest hint of skunk or a screwup in quality is immediately noticeable. Whereas, in darker, heavier flavored beers, you can almost literally place a skunk into the beer and most will hide it. That's the point.

      Now if you want to argue you simply don't like the flavor, I certainly don't have a problem with that. More power too you! Regardless, the simple fact is, the required quality of those, "inferior beers", sadly, almost always exceeds those, by far, which others openly brag about. Add to the fact they are obtaining and maintaining such high quality at such massive scales is all the more embarrassing for those other, typically European, brands.

      As you say, there are plenty of American micro- and regional- breweries making great beer.

      At one point in time, early in American's history, America had more micro breweries than did Europe. America literally became king of the brew. At this point in time, American offered greater quality and taste. A lot of European brewers followed. And in fact, much of what is considered European brew was directly lifted from American breweries. It became a full circle (Europe -> America -> Europe). Eventually, larger brewers took over because of bottling technology improvement meant the death of smaller brewers; who sometimes did lack in quality and consistency. With the exception of the highly specialized brews, where personal preference is highly subjective, American's microbreweries represent the best beers the world has to offer. That not to say European beers are paled in comparison. What I'm saying is, American, in its own right, has a proud beer tradition which easily rivals that of the best of traditional European beers.

      Which means, at the end of the day, almost without fail, those ridiculing any segment of the American beer market are actually exposing their ineptitude and ignorance for beer in general; begging to be entirely ignored. At the end of the day, the flavor is all that matters; be it a heavy, all absorbing tone or a light, refreshing accent, and everything in between. It either speaks to you or it doesn't. Regardless, you can't shake a finger at American big brand beer as being inferior - as factually and scientifically, its not. This is a simple truth which any honest industry Brew Master will share.

      (*) Please note, I refer you to Samuel Adams not because I endorse their product but because they are a highly regarded and highly acclaimed American brewery; even outside of the US.

    78. Re:The science of better Guinness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Black Butte Porter, Obsidian Stout, Stone Imperial Russian Stout, and Contorter Porter quickly come to mind as beating the pants off of imported Guinness, as does any of the offerings from either Rogue or Bell's (except for Bell's Cherry Stout which sucks--the sole exception for an otherwise world-beating brewery). Your locale probably has a microbrewery or craft brewer that can do the same.

    79. Re:The science of better Guinness by billcopc · · Score: 1

      Leffe Blonde is just as awful in Ottawa, but I'm quite fond of the occasional dessert-like Leffe Brune.

      If you want a good Belgian brew, get a true Trappist beer. The authentic ones are expensive, but if you're a beer geek it is worth every penny. "Abbey" beers are a marketing ploy by the mass-brewers to cash in on the Trappists' reputation, but they don't even come close.

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    80. Re:The science of better Guinness by _0xd0ad · · Score: 1

      Well... now you know why it's illegal to transport alcoholic beverages across state lines.

    81. Re:The science of better Guinness by mrmeval · · Score: 1

      I like my own home brewed porters and stouts. Home brewers had problems getting good hops the last couple of years and prices are still high.

      For commercial porters that I can stand drinking I go to the Oaken Barrel in Greenwood, In or pick up Anchor Steam porter.

      I'm not interested in making foam, if I were interested in making foam I 'd be making styrofoam. It would taste better than Guinness.

      --
      I'd go on a Vegan diet but the delivery time from Vega is too long. --brownkitty
    82. Re:The science of better Guinness by billcopc · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Canada has American-style beer, which dominates the market due to excessive marketing and abusive exclusivity deals with the mainstream bars.

      Many, many years ago we had a commercial for (i think) Molson Canadian, which poked fun at American beers: "If I wanted water, I'd ask for water. No thanks!" It still tasted like faded piss, but the true irony is that Molson eventually merged with Coors, so the company that compared beer to water is now selling the world's most watery beer, and at least here in Ottawa they are practically shoving it down our throats with excessive promotion and abusive exclusivity deals. I once attended a Superbowl party at a bar, where they only served Coors Light for the event. You couldn't even order a rail drink.

      I can't tell if it's a beer geek thing, but all the mass-marketed brands are repulsive to me. Coors, Keiths, Labatt 50, Heineken, Stella, Guinness. It doesn't matter what country it's from, if they pimp it on TV, chances are it's going to be awful. I guess that goes to show that marketing trumps quality, every goddamned time.

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    83. Re:The science of better Guinness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I never understood why people drink vodka. The cheap stuff is foul and the good stuff is tasteless, so all either can do is a) get you drunk, or b) well, I was going to say you can add it to things that won't get you drunk, but with vodka now they can. So that's just a repeat of point a. If you need a flavorless food-friendly disinfectant or solvent then vodka's your booze of choice, but otherwise? Worthless.

    84. Re:The science of better Guinness by billcopc · · Score: 1

      They are often called "American-style lager" or "American adjunct lager", due to their reliance on rice and corn grains and barely-perceptible malting. The problem is that only these awful, mass-produced tasteless products have any advertising budget, so that's all most people have ever heard of. After all, to afford those absurd TV spots, sponsorships, contests and protective exclusivity rebates, they have to cut costs somewhere, right ?

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    85. Re:The science of better Guinness by _0xd0ad · · Score: 1

      The taxes are $14/L for alcohol in the US I think.

      Not sure where you got that figure, but from what I find, alcohol taxes on spirits vary from state to state ranging between $1.50 and $6.50 per gallon (of liquor, not actual alcohol content).

    86. Re:The science of better Guinness by dwywit · · Score: 2

      Indeed. Guinness from a tap in Eire tastes different (better) than just about anywhere else. I was impressed with the number of Guinness company cars parked outside Irish pubs - I thought they were just out delivering promo gear (like bar towels?). I eventually asked a publican about it, and he told me that they're visited regularly for quality control purposes - all aspects of the delivery system are checked - temperature, pressure, cleanliness, etc.

      Guinness here in OZ doesn't taste as good, unfortunately, and even the widget cans are disappointing. BTW, Beamish is a smoother, creamier stout that I found in a few pubs - Murphy's wasn't bad, either.

      --
      They sentenced me to twenty years of boredom
    87. Re:The science of better Guinness by Man+Eating+Duck · · Score: 1

      Who pays $20 for cheap vodka?!

      In Norway the cheapest Vodka (and about the cheapest liquor in general) you can legally buy costs about $62/L. Yay for sin taxes.

      --
      Are you a grammar Nazi? I'm trying to improve my English; please correct my errors! :)
    88. Re:The science of better Guinness by fatphil · · Score: 1

      "Bass Pale Ale or Dogfish Head Shelter Pale Ale."

      Bass Pale Ale is not good beer. It's brewed by InBev, the largest brewery company in the world, run by beancounters rather than people who care about the taste of the beer. The quality (i.e. reproducability) is reasonable, it's just always predictably not good. I've always thought DFH were poor on the quality front (good at their best, but very poor at their worst (fort, bletch)), and it's nice to see someone place them alongside a beer that is so bad. You've reinforced my negative view of DHF whilst you were attempting to praise it.

      However, what you say about focussing on good drinks, ones respected for the craft and care of the brewer/distiller/blender, is a view I share.

      --
      Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
    89. Re:The science of better Guinness by suppo · · Score: 1

      Mod up. Goober Too's remarks are spot on.

      I'm not a commercial brew master, but have over 100 batches of all grain home brew under my belt (literally). The ability to make a consistent light lager (Bud/Miller/Coors, etc.) with geographically different water, hops that vary annually due to weather and other variables, and at different breweries with different people is extremely complex and frankly amazing.

      That said, just because the mega-breweries do a skillful job, I don't like the style. Give me a highly hopped, high gravity ale with some real flavor and mouth feel any day. And Murphy's Irish Stout is superior to Guinness, IMNSHO.

      --
      NON-geek Linux user since 1998
    90. Re:The science of better Guinness by _0xd0ad · · Score: 1

      so all either can do is a) get you drunk, or ...

      You needed more reasons?

    91. Re:The science of better Guinness by fatphil · · Score: 1

      The best Guinness I've drunk was in Ireland, and it was indeed quite good. However, the Murphys and Beamish were generally better, and the Porterhouse stouts wiped the floor with it. The single worst Guinness I had in Ireland was in the Guinness Storehouse museum's bar ("free" with your 14e entry to the museum). More depressing than seeing how little Guinness cared about the quality of their brewing was to see all the damn tourists who wouldn't know a brewing flaw lap that muck up as if it was actually good. Sheep.

      --
      Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
    92. Re:The science of better Guinness by fatphil · · Score: 1

      It's started to improve in very recent years. That is after reaching pretty much rock bottom. I only know one country with a worse beer scene than Ireland of the noughties, and that's the one I live in. As a beer nut, that's a little frustrating, but my goodness it's a great excuse to travel.

      --
      Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
    93. Re:The science of better Guinness by stonewallred · · Score: 1
      You are an idiot, or assume the US is one place.

      I can buy a fifth of Everclear 151 proof (was until just recently available as 190 proof) for $18.31 USD, which includes tax.

    94. Re:The science of better Guinness by Sulphur · · Score: 1

      I am not drunk. I paid a lot of money learning to walk like this.

      --

      Where can I buy a good ancient Egyptian beer.

    95. Re:The science of better Guinness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Me and my zombie friends only drink Brains.

    96. Re:The science of better Guinness by budgenator · · Score: 1

      They have pizza in Italy?

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    97. Re:The science of better Guinness by _0xd0ad · · Score: 1

      Everclear 151 proof (was until just recently available as 190 proof)

      WHAT.

    98. Re:The science of better Guinness by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      I like Pacifico.....and while it is kinda on he level of Corona...I actually like to down a good bit of Tecate too....as far as MX beers go.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    99. Re:The science of better Guinness by mug+funky · · Score: 1

      The ability to make a consistent light lager (Bud/Miller/Coors, etc.) with geographically different water, hops that vary annually due to weather and other variables, and at different breweries with different people is extremely complex and frankly amazing.

      easy done - just mix them all together :)

    100. Re:The science of better Guinness by mug+funky · · Score: 2

      don't laugh, but my wife is like that too.

      her partial cerebral palsy makes her the target of many an ignorant bouncer.

      it's good to see the look on their faces when they realize they're risking their jobs by refusing her entry.

      especially if she really is drunk :)

    101. Re:The science of better Guinness by mug+funky · · Score: 1

      Cooper's stout is pretty damn nice.

      guinness is certainly better at the source.

    102. Re:The science of better Guinness by dwywit · · Score: 1

      Try Cascade stout - a bit fizzy, but I think it tastes better than Cooper's.

      --
      They sentenced me to twenty years of boredom
    103. Re:The science of better Guinness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Guinness is my "Jacks or Better" beer.

      In Ireland or parts elsewhere, Guinness might be a low rung on the beer ladder but, on this side of the pond, unfortunately, it is often the best. If I go to a bar or restaurant that doesn't have Guinness, at least, or, preferably, something better, I'll drink root beer instead.

    104. Re:The science of better Guinness by dark+grep · · Score: 1

      When you have the finest beverage ever made, why would you complain about not having other choices? Think of the time it saves the drinking man - 'I will have a pint of _______' or 'I will have a pint'. - which means a pint of Guinness of course, since that is the only choice. That is probably like 2 seconds saved on every round, which over a year of drinking would add up to 1.5 HOURS per year - or in real terms, 4 pints per year extra!!!!! Choice - bah.

    105. Re:The science of better Guinness by dark+grep · · Score: 1

      Right so you have proved the point right there, so you have, to be sure to be sure.

    106. Re:The science of better Guinness by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      While I accept your point, I strongly disagree with your suggested "tasty" drinks. Islay scotches and pale ales tend to be challenging drinks,.

      everyone takes "Pale Ales" as "India Pale Ales," which are challenging. A pale ale is an EXTREMELY mild drink; the classic British Bitter is a well-balanced pale ale, and not very bitter. To put this in perspective, Sam Adams Boston Lager made me cry when I first tried beer (not used to bitter things at all), but a British Bitter pale ale was much less bitter and more palatable... it was the first beer I actually liked. I did like 60 Minute IPA by Dogfish Head, it tasted GOOD; but it was so damn hoppy (being an IPA) that it was like taking a brick to the face repeatedly.

      Scottish ale is a pale ale, by the way; and the first time I tried red wine, I couldn't drink it (and white wine is pissy water) because it's too bitter and harsh. I still only really drink tawny port (ruby is too chewy and sweet) because a good red wine is completely incompatible with my palate.

    107. Re:The science of better Guinness by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      DFH has some disasters and some middle-grounds (60 Minute IPA is a love-hate kind of thing, 90 I can't stand), but their shelter pale ale is a favorite of mine. It's an extremely simple and relatively light pale ale that develops a nutty flavor by some magic; I've been meaning to brew a Belgian style pale ale that does the same thing with just hops, barley, and yeast.

      Bass isn't particularly ground-breaking, but it's a decent pale ale. Have you had Miller? Or National Bohemian? Bass is easier to drink than Sierra Nevada; but Sierra Nevada is better. The problem is most Americans don't tolerate bitterness after living the high life on super-sugary sodas and sweet ketchup and sugar-packed sweet pickles. You give them a good beer and they gag on the bitterness; you need something good, but light. Sierra Nevada Pale Ale is entirely too bitter, and it's a very light pale ale itself; personally I can't drink Sierra Nevada Torpedo, their IPA, because it's too bitter (and Dogfish Head 60 Minute IPA is better, to my palate, despite being quite bitter itself-- Torpedo tastes too grassy, while 60 Minute has a very floral head from their choice of hops with a lot of malty taste to back up the bitter hoppiness).

      There is a barrier to entry here. Be aware of it. If you think Islays cross that line too much, then I recommend Tullamore Dew (fuck tasteless Jameson's) in the cheap end.

    108. Re:The science of better Guinness by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      ... because the crap you buy at BP was brewed in $RANDOM_COUNTRY using -part- of the mixture shipped from Dublin... and the kind you can get in Dublin is directly from the source!

      That's like telling my your 1980s Ford with a chevy transmission is no better than a 2011 right off the lot.

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    109. Re:The science of better Guinness by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      Yes, they do. And the Napoli style is words better than the Roma style.

      Another quirk: they don't mix the toppings. If you ask for peperoni and mushrooms, you get a pizza with peperoni on one half and mushrooms on the other.

      But it tastes divine.

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    110. Re:The science of better Guinness by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      What gives you the right?

      He's on the Internet!

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    111. Re:The science of better Guinness by fotbr · · Score: 1

      You do realize that I didn't make any claims about it being shitty beer because it was "light"? So your entire response is based on as assumption that I don't know what I'm talking about.

      I, and my friends, make fun of the big brands as producing shit beer, because it all tastes like crap. Yes, it's high quality crap, but it's still crap all the same. Most beer drinkers that I know with similar opinions of the big American brands know it takes a lot of quality control to pull it off, but don't accept that quality control as being a marker of "good" beer, because in the end, it tastes like crap. Of course, we're almost all homebrewers, and as such have a better understanding of what goes into making a good beer, and the processes therein, than the average guy-on-the-street.

    112. Re:The science of better Guinness by GooberToo · · Score: 1

      Perhaps I missed it because I wrote it and see what I expect to see, but I don't see where I presume you "don't know anything." Much of my post was speaking to the ether; more of an editorial as most people really have no clue about the subject matter in question. Hell, despite being factually accurate, one of my posts were troll moderated. Please remember these posts are not private emails, its part of a public exchange.

      Largely, when I said, "you", I meant, you the reader (generalized collective) rather than you specifically. If you've read some of my other posts you'll note I don't have a problem being confrontational and that was certainly not my intent here. I have no issue whatsoever with the post to which I replied. My intent was to simply add to and specifically address what you said with far more detail as many people are completely ignorant, and frequently purposely mislead on the subject, yet hold the view you suggested they do.

      I apologize if you believe I singled you out in my post in a derogatorily or belittling manner - as that was not my intent. Though honestly, because of the low quality of slashdot readers and moderators these days, I rarely proof read a post so its entirely possible my choice of terminology communicated meaning which I did not intend to express. Sometimes choice of small words mean everything.

    113. Re:The science of better Guinness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Grow your own! I started with four freshly-planted rhizomes in my community garden plot last spring. They grew very, very fast and this year I'll have to pull up one of them due to crowding. Even though you're not supposed to expect a measurable amount of hops your first year, I got quite a bit. Four ounces from my Saaz rhizome, three from my Cascade, and about two from the Northern Brewers. The Willamette produced little and put a lot more energy into the root system. Drying is tricky if you don't make an oast, but the oven with a fan blowing in and a thermometer worked tolerably well (minus one batch scorched). For freezing I'll upgrade this year to a Seal-A-Meal. Alpha acid content can vary outside of expectations, though. I can't test mine but from an amber I made with my cascade hops compared to a previous batch with store bought hops, my cascade hops must have a lot more alpha acid content.

    114. Re:The science of better Guinness by WitnessForTheOffense · · Score: 1

      My Foreign Extra says that it was brewed in Ireland.

  2. Anecdotal Research by ghurlag · · Score: 1

    I'll take a chance for the betterment of mankind. Put me on the list of test subjects :)

  3. "The Industry ?" by think_nix · · Score: 1

    Hell Ill test Guinness for free :D

  4. DEMOPAN by Shikaku · · Score: 1

    Stout Shako for 2 refined.

  5. The science of liquid bread? by bhcompy · · Score: 1

    The science of liquid bread?

    Get me a pilsner, please. It goes well with this pudding.

    1. Re:The science of liquid bread? by Faux_Pseudo · · Score: 1

      tThere is more barley in a pilsner than a stout. Guinness is one of the lightest beers ut there.

    2. Re:The science of liquid bread? by pthisis · · Score: 1

      Yep. At 120 calories/12oz, Guinness is much closer to light beers (Bud Light is 110 calories/12oz) than to a standard Bud, Heineken, MGD, Coors, Corona or the like (generally in the 140-160 calories/12oz range).

      --
      rage, rage against the dying of the light
    3. Re:The science of liquid bread? by 19thNervousBreakdown · · Score: 1

      This seems like the place for people who know their Guinness, so has anyone noticed that the bottles being sold in the last 6 months or so are missing the widgets? I can't say for sure if there's a difference between with and without, but I've wondered what the heck happened to them.

      --
      <xml><I><am><so><damn>Web 2.0</damn></so></am></I></xml>
    4. Re:The science of liquid bread? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I noticed this in the bottles of Draught over the weekend. I still had widgets in my Draught bottles around December though.

    5. Re:The science of liquid bread? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the cans still have them.

      As far as calories go, I found it interesting that a can of Guinness has less calories than the same amount of Mt Dew. The anti-oxidant properties of it make it better for me too.

    6. Re:The science of liquid bread? by _0xd0ad · · Score: 1

      As far as calories go, I found it interesting that a can of Guinness has less calories than the same amount of Mt Dew.

      Just about anything has less calories than sugar-water.

      A 12 fl. oz. can of Mountain Dew contains 47 grams of sugar. The specific gravity of Mt. Dew (according to Google) is about 1.046, i.e. it has a density of 1.046 g/cm^3. Do the math and you find that it's 12.66% sugar by weight...

    7. Re:The science of liquid bread? by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 1

      The science of liquid bread?

      Get me a pilsner, please. It goes well with this pudding.

      A lot of people don't know this but the best thing you can sample in Ireland is not the beer but the multitude of breads, particularly in the north where bread is a very important part of the diet, on a par with the spuds in its importance. There's the soda bread (white, light, fluffy and to-die-for when fresh, comes in an infinite number of configurations), wheaten (very heavy, almost a meal in itself, pan (that would be a normal loaf everywhere else), batch (AKA 'plain' bread, which Ulster people think of as a normal loaf, heavier texture than pan bread and with a harder top crust), potato bread (aka spud bread, known as potato cakes in Scotland), Veda, fruit malt, fruit loaves, the soda breads with the raisins.... on and on it goes.

      --
      Drill baby drill - on Mars
  6. Finally... by kj_kabaje · · Score: 2

    a *practical* use for mathematics.

    1. Re:Finally... by Celarent+Darii · · Score: 2

      Actually Guiness has quite a history of practical application of mathematics.

      Namely, the Student distribution (or t-distribution), known to any statistics student, was developed by Gosset of Guiness brewery.

      More here:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Sealy_Gosset

  7. I'm sorry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I got distracted right about here:
    "Mathematicians invented a new method to can and bottle stout beers like Guinness while still getting that satisfying head."

  8. Satisfying head by Hatta · · Score: 4, Funny

    That's appropriate. Canned and bottled beer has always helped me get satisfying head.

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    1. Re:Satisfying head by HornWumpus · · Score: 3, Funny

      We really don't want to know how you get the flavor out of your mouth.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    2. Re:Satisfying head by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He just told you. You get the nasty beer flavor out of your mouth by giving head.

    3. Re:Satisfying head by Neutral_Observer · · Score: 0

      All I got yesterday was a steak :(

    4. Re:Satisfying head by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

      I had to make myself a sandwich.

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
  9. Beer Science? by flaming+error · · Score: 1

    I was hoping they re-discovered how to split the beer atom.

    1. Re:Beer Science? by Drakkenmensch · · Score: 1

      Oh dear god, please let Young Einstein stay dead and not come back as a remake!!!

  10. research by Faux_Pseudo · · Score: 1

    This is the type of science that wins an Ig Noble.

    1. Re:research by ackthpt · · Score: 1

      This is the type of science that wins an Ig Noble.

      Nope. It's far too useful. It also connects nerdy mathematicians with the general public, which isn't a bad thing.

      A bit too late for this St. Patrick's Day, but maybe next year.

      More of a Twisted Thistle man, myself these days.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    2. Re:research by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 1

      This is the type of science that wins an Ig Noble.

      Knocking a few cents off the cost of every can of beer sold? Sounds like a big deal to me.

      --
      Drill baby drill - on Mars
    3. Re:research by Faux_Pseudo · · Score: 1

      It is a big deal. I am a little taken aback that people on slashdot don't seem to grasp the Ig Noble. It isn't a bad science award. It is, as their site says:
      The Ig Nobel Prizes honor achievements that first make people laugh, and then make them think. The prizes are intended to celebrate the unusual, honor the imaginative — and spur people's interest in science, medicine, and technology.

  11. Dammit, I was so close by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dammit, and I was so close too after years of research. "Line the rims of cans and bottles with a material similar to an ordinary coffee filter" was next on my list, right after "Call up ex and ask why she doesn't love me anymore".

  12. My GF gives satisfying head to my stout! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My GF gives satisfying head to my stout!

  13. Late to the game by pthisis · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Their work suggests that lining the rims of cans and bottles with a material similar to an ordinary coffee filter would be a simpler, cheaper alternative to the widget.

    The good people at Guinness have already figured out the widgetless bottle; as of early this year, their draught bottles no longer contain a floating widget (at least in the US).

    --
    rage, rage against the dying of the light
    1. Re:Late to the game by adeft · · Score: 2

      I've read a few posts from beer snobs on other forums saying it's a travesty of justice and doesn't get the same pour. As an American Irish, I still very much like this beer.

    2. Re:Late to the game by highfidelitychris · · Score: 1

      I don't think they ever had them in the bottles, just the cans.

    3. Re:Late to the game by amRadioHed · · Score: 1

      No, they had them in the bottles.

      --
      We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
    4. Re:Late to the game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Brilliant!

    5. Re:Late to the game by jimicus · · Score: 1

      You would be amazed how many projects proudly announce they've solved problem "X" (where problem "X" is one that was solved in the real world 12-24 months previously).

      Or, even more absurdly, proudly announce (complete with great big long academic papers explaining in excruciating detail) how problem "X" cannot be solved, and how it's not really that desirable to solve it anyway. Naturally, "X" is something that has already been solved by someone else and is now one of the biggest selling points they offer.

  14. Not the same by rizzo420 · · Score: 4, Informative

    I can only assume the post is talking solely about stouts like Guinness Draught in a nitro-can that has a widget to release nitrogen. There is more to what that widget does than just give the beer a nice creamy head. It gives the entire beer a different mouthfeel, and that's because of the nitrogen, not carbon dioxide (though the beer does already contain carbon dioxide. So, if they want the same effect, you'll still need a widget (or in the case of the bottled Guinness Draught, the proper mix of the gases). However, nitrogen dulls the flavor of the beer. So the effect this story talks about would not leave the beer the same...

    --
    please me, have no regrets.
    1. Re:Not the same by loufoque · · Score: 1

      Why would you want a tasteless Guinness Draught when you can get a Guinness Original, which has a much richer taste?
      The latter also doesn't have that nitrogen thing.

    2. Re:Not the same by rizzo420 · · Score: 1

      That's my view. But Guinness Draught is quite popular.

      --
      please me, have no regrets.
    3. Re:Not the same by konohitowa · · Score: 1

      RTFA

  15. I look forward to more research on this subject. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I look forward to researching this further at about 5pm at
    a local neighborhood laboratory.
     

  16. Patented? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is this a "public domain" type invention, or "by license" type invention?

    (The widget is patented.)

    http://home.comcast.net/~tabco/widget.htm

  17. The right way to do it. by bcf · · Score: 2
    Forget widgets. Here's what you need.

    And, of course, a keg of stout from your better supplied liquor outlet.
    Stout nirvana awaits.

    1. Re:The right way to do it. by Silentknyght · · Score: 2

      Forget widgets. Here's what you need.

      And, of course, a keg of stout from your better supplied liquor outlet.

      Stout nirvana awaits.

      For the people who prefer Guinness, I think the investment for homebrewed draft stout is a wee heavy.

    2. Re:The right way to do it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For the people who prefer Guinness, I think the investment for homebrewed draft stout is a wee heavy.

      Funny you should say homebrew and wee heavy.

    3. Re:The right way to do it. by bcf · · Score: 1

      However, this permanently resolves the dilemma of what to do when you have two guests (and yourself), but just one four-pack of Guinness Draught in cans.

    4. Re:The right way to do it. by CraftyJack · · Score: 1

      For the people who prefer Guinness, I think the investment for homebrewed draft stout is a wee heavy.

      You don't hefe to agree wit him, but it's still a good plan.

    5. Re:The right way to do it. by drsquare · · Score: 1

      Gas? Proper beer is hand-drawn son.

      But I suppose it doesn't really matter for tasteless commercial swill like Guinness.

    6. Re:The right way to do it. by fatphil · · Score: 1

      "draught" having the same root as "drawn", indeed.

      But these guys are talking about "draft" beers instead (from bottles and cans too). To me, a draft is a sketchy approximation that you come up with before you do the real thing.

      --
      Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
  18. THANK YOU GOD!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    this article right here is enfough proff for me that THERE IS A GOD!!!!! CHEERS MATES!!!!!!

    1. Re:THANK YOU GOD!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      this man is a Genius!

  19. "getting that satisfying head" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The only head many on here would be getting

    1. Re:"getting that satisfying head" by Neutral_Observer · · Score: 0

      No head from my mom in my basement. DYAC! No head in my mom's basement.

  20. Nucleation... by rAiNsT0rm · · Score: 1

    They've "invented" nothing more than the same concept behind the Mentos/Coke thing, nucleation. If you give enough surface area for the bubbles you can vary the amount from the average can/bottle opening to the geyser. A few trial and errors would get you there for something trivial like beer, not complex math and modeling and academic journals.

    This is also the reason why super new mugs/glasses can "superheat" water in a microwave for the opposite reason, they are too smooth.

    Oh, and Nitrogen is what does the trick for Guinness, not simply some bubbles. And forget what you've been told, drinking your Guinness while it is leveling is where it's at, not letting it sit and topping off. That was done back in the day when people were poorer and felt like they weren't getting a proper pint for their money, the extra ounce is not worth it compared to drinking it as it should be.

    --
    http://teasphere.wordpress.com - A little spot of tea
    1. Re:Nucleation... by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      Is this why you should never use a non-dairy creamer with the microwave at work? Because the water may become superheated without nucleation, and then when you add a non-dairy creamer to the superheated coffee you suddenly get massive nucleation, a steam explosion, and hot water and superheated steam all over your arms?

    2. Re:Nucleation... by rAiNsT0rm · · Score: 1

      That's exactly it. But honestly it's a bit misguided because anything would have the same effect, dropping in a spoon, some sugar, even just jostling the mug a bit can be enough. The safest bet is to just heat the water for a sane amount of time roughly 2-2.5 min max in a home microwave and 1-1.5 in a commercial one. That is plenty hot for almost anything and almost no chance of danger, I see people put water in for like 4+ minutes... that is asking for trouble.

      I once worked for a university and one of the companies handed out free mugs that looked like beakers and made of their lab glass... because they were so super smooth inside people were getting hurt left and right. I'm guessing that was a solid marketing fail. :)

      --
      http://teasphere.wordpress.com - A little spot of tea
    3. Re:Nucleation... by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      The real solution is to use hot water instead of a microwave. My mom won't use a microwave to boil water because "the radiation changes the stuff in the water to make it a poison" (talking about straight water, not coffee or noodles), but she'll cook other stuff in it; I attribute this to her being a retard, but being an even bigger retard than physically possible. I won't use a microwave because I've never bought one and don't need one. I always hated the results I got from a microwave anyway.

  21. Canned Guinness? No thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Canned Guinness is an abomination, and bottled Guinness (Extra Stout) is a different product altogether. Worse again is Guinness served outside of Ireland, which is invariably poured wrong and at the wrong temperature. If you haven't had Guinness from a *good* Irish pub you haven't really had Guinness. I learned that the hard way :p

      - Irish AC who likes his Guinness -

    1. Re:Canned Guinness? No thanks by mcneely.mike · · Score: 0

      That's the only way i'll probably buy another guinness...
      For me, i like Fullers London Porter... stouts taken to 11.

      --
      soylentnews.org Go there to enjoy the people!
    2. Re:Canned Guinness? No thanks by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

      So, what you're saying is, if it's not Irish it's crap?

      --
      I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
    3. Re:Canned Guinness? No thanks by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

      Fullers ESB! Too bad they stopped distribution in New Mexico.

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    4. Re:Canned Guinness? No thanks by mcneely.mike · · Score: 0

      Yeah, haven't seen that in Canada (around me, anyways)

      --
      soylentnews.org Go there to enjoy the people!
  22. The data on the mig is inaccurate by kelemvor4 · · Score: 1

    Although the article does say "beers LIKE guinness" there are plenty of other good beer that are nitrogen carbonated. AFAIK that does not include all stout beers like the article implies, nor is notro carbonation limited only to stouts. Not only that but "Guinness stout" is not nitro carbonated, it's "Guinness draft" that's nitro (and perhaps a few others). There are 11 different varieties of Guinness beer. I've only had two, and they're not very similar in my opinion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guinness#Varieties

  23. Obligatory Limerick by nowen2dot · · Score: 1

    Once while lying in bed,
    Dr. Lee said, "This stout has no head."
    The bottlers made spheres
    to foam up the beers,
    But Lee's filter will be used instead.

    Okay, so I'm not very good at these.

    --
    I've had a perfectly wonderful evening. But this wasn't it. -- Groucho Marx
  24. Beer With a Satisfying Head? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All head should be satisfying, with or without the beer.

  25. This is all very well... by Rhodri+Mawr · · Score: 1

    ...but does it work for the most famous of Belgian Beers? - Smurfing Beer! --> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zff5LVkDzHA

  26. Irish science is finally catching up by RevWaldo · · Score: 1

    Irish science is finally catching up to life before the fall.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ECkA216RL4Y

    .

  27. Why would you bother? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Guinness proves the adage that the better the advertising, the worse the product. There are hundreds of far better stouts brewed and they don't need gimmicks like artificially frothy heads because they actually taste good. And to any sensible drinker, it's the taste that matters, not the bullshit.

  28. Guinness Likes Science by pyite · · Score: 1

    Guinness has a nice history of using math and science in improving their product.

    Student's t-distribution was conceived by William Sealy Gosset while working at Guinness.

    --

    "Nature doesn't care how smart you are. You can still be wrong." - Richard Feynman

  29. Not quite... by denzacar · · Score: 2

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guinness#Worldwide_sales

    About 40% of worldwide total Guinness volume is brewed and sold in Africa, with Foreign Extra Stout the most popular variant. The Michael Power advertising campaign was a critical success for Guinness in Africa, running for nearly a decade before being replaced in 2006 with "Guinness Greatness".

    Guinness Stout is brewed under licence internationally in several countries, including Nigeria,[69][70] the Bahamas, Canada[71], and Indonesia.[72] The unfermented but hopped Guinness wort extract is shipped from Dublin and blended with beer brewed locally.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  30. Beer in a blender by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For years I tried to make something like Guinness. Then I discovered that it was gasified using nitrogen rather than carbon dioxide.

    Nitrogen is the biggest component of air; so I tried aerating my home made stout in the blender. It worked great. Of course, you have to drink the beer right away because the oxygen in the beer will quickly spoil it.

    If you have a spare bottle of not great stout, try the experiment. It doesn't work for every dark beer though. I tried it on a dark beer made in the the Caribbean. That beer was still yecchy.

    (Yes I know the difference between lager and ale/stout/porter. I use the word beer because I'm lazy.)

  31. Beer is overrated anyway by sdguero · · Score: 1

    I bet I'll get modded troll for this but I gotta say it.

    Whats with all the beer snobs nowadays? 10 years ago, I could enjoy a cold Coors Light without having to worry about Joe Hipster giving me crap for drinking it. When I drink a beer, it doesn't have to be an excursion in the history of beer making and I don't need to have the perfect glass for a pilsner. To me, drinking beer is about getting shit faced, usually with friends. I don't give a crap if it tastes less hoppy or has carmel undertones. I usually just want a f*ckin beer, and then I want another one.

    Sure, Guinness tastes pretty good, but for me its too heavy. After 5 or 6 I'm ready for a nap. And it has the same alcohol percentage as Coors Light, so it doesn't get you any drunker. It just tastes better (arguably), fills you up more, and costs twice as much. To me the marginal utility I receive from a cheap domestic ($0.50 beer that I can drink 12 of and get shitfaced) is far superior to any import or micro brew if I'm drinking to get drunk. And most of the time, that is exactly why I'm drinking.

    1. Re:Beer is overrated anyway by plopez · · Score: 1

      try a nice 8 pct ale with lots of hops. Hops btw are related to marijuana. After two pints you will start to feel a bit "shit faced". Then again on a hot summer day, Coors Light hits the spot. It's good for keeping you hydrated.

      --
      putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
    2. Re:Beer is overrated anyway by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Think of something you do care about.

      Now imagine all the people that just use the absolutely worst available (of whatever you care about.)

      That is you.

      Coors light is not even beer. It's a cereal malt beverage like Zima.

      For simply getting drunk you should switch to Vodka. Making Vodka is a science, the moderately cheep stuff is as good as it gets.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    3. Re:Beer is overrated anyway by nowen2dot · · Score: 1

      To me, drinking beer is about getting shit faced, usually with friends. I don't give a crap if it tastes less hoppy or has carmel undertones.

      And do you also only eat to get full so any cheap ass dogfood will do? Some people actually enjoy drinks and aren't just drinking to get shit faced. It's not about being snobs. And I don't think you are trolling. Maybe a bit off-topic, but then many of the discussions here went astray. (Including mine.)

      But perhaps you weren't speaking of the discussions here.
      Now if Joe Hipster is giving you crap...I'll agree he does sound like a snob...so he can buy the next round.

      --
      I've had a perfectly wonderful evening. But this wasn't it. -- Groucho Marx
    4. Re:Beer is overrated anyway by sdguero · · Score: 1

      When I'm starving, dog food tastes just fine. Usually when I need a drink its a similar feeling. Anything will do.

      Joe Hipster tends not to understand this need (aka alcoholism) and has plenty of opinions about my lifestyle that he will air loudly to whoever will listen. Sometimes he does so fearlessly, as Joe Hipster doesn't have to fear a punch in the mouth these days, and rarely has money to buy a round to recompense. After all, he just spent $9 on a cup of 14% barley wine which he will undoubtedly proclaim as the greatest beverage to ever have been brewed. Joe Hipster's escape is a world of critique, banter, and elitism.

      I don't see Joe Hipster's world as an ends in itself; it is tiring and cyclical. I prefer a darker place with hiccups and dancing elephants. And boobs. Boobs are cool.

    5. Re:Beer is overrated anyway by sdguero · · Score: 1

      Thank you for helping make my point. Coors light is most definitely a beer, and my beer of choice when i'm out drinking, especially if I'm gonna yorsh. Zima is nothing like it but that won't stop Joe Hipster from telling me they are the same and that coors light sucks.

      Critiquing beer has become trendy and those doing the critiquing usually have no idea what they are talking about. "Beer advocates." lol. What constitutes a "good" beer is a matter of opinion, and I think Coors light is just fine for getting drunk.

      Now if I wanted to weigh over 300 pounds, I'd start chugging pale ales, stouts, and barley wine. However I think there are better lifestyle options out there, and I don't want mine to be dictated by an elitist regional subculture centered around a fucking beverage.

    6. Re:Beer is overrated anyway by glodime · · Score: 1

      When I'm starving, dog food tastes just fine. Usually when I need a drink its a similar feeling. Anything will do.

      Seek help. You are an alcoholic.

    7. Re:Beer is overrated anyway by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Beer is the beverage made out of malted barley, hops, yeast, water and nothing else.

      Coors light contains rice, hence it is not beer. It is a cereal malt beverage like Zima and Budweiser.

      Definitions are not matters of opinion. Granting you can find other definitions. If you insist: Coors Light is beer, just like Zima.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    8. Re:Beer is overrated anyway by sdguero · · Score: 2

      Rice is in a lot of beers. Pretty much all Asian beers have rice in them. And none of them taste like Zima. Worldwide, more beer is sold with rice in it than without, which if we use popularity as a point of reference, debunks your argument that the definition of beer only has the few ingredients you listed.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beer#Ingredients
      Zima is a type of malt beverage. It also tasted nothing like beer as it had powerful sweeteners. Zima was also never called beer by Coors. Rather, it was marketed as an option for people who don't like beer. Note the past tense, as Zima is no longer produced.

      As I mentioned in my first post, the history of beer (including it's original ingredients) is rather boring and redundant to me. The advent of large breweries that take advantage of the economies of scale is far more impactful on my life than what some monks were doing in their basement 500 years ago. If people want to relive how things used to be that's fine with me, but I tire of getting laughed at and lectured at bars by beer snobs. Being told that what you are happily drinking is somehow substandard is annoying and abrasive.

    9. Re:Beer is overrated anyway by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only according to Reinheitzgebot. However even in Germany you'll find things like...hefeweizen. Bizarrely in Germany you can sometimes find makers of wheat beers claiming to abide by the Reinheitzgebot! There are a great many different things you can do and have something that rightfully is called beer. I finished off the last bottle of a batch of a stout I made that was mostly wheat. I've got a strawberry sour ale recipe (that's fucking awesome with tacos) that I'll want to start a batch of in about a month, a juniper pale ale currently in my primary fermenter, and am drinking a glass of a brown ale that's bittered by not only hops from my garden but also some horehound I grew. It would be insane to not call these beverages beer. Why limit yourself? Even the uber-uptight German brewers don't.

  32. Beer research from the University of Limerick? by inviolet · · Score: 2

    Clearly, this event justifies a limerick:

    A student at Limerick college
    Expanded our stout beer knowledge,
    As a means to the end
    of drinking with friends;
    This much he should acknowledge.

    --
    FATMOUSE + YOU = FATMOUSE
  33. The Science of Brew Masters by plopez · · Score: 2

    At a near by Uni. where I live they have a brew master's program. There is great enthusiasm among new undergrads until they learn what the pre-requirements for the program are: biology, chemistry, physics, statistics, and all the math courses required for those courses. Then except for a dedicated few, their enthusiasm fades. Even so there is a waiting list.

    In the course they brew up a batch of good beer which is then only sold at the beer garden of the Uni. The proceeds go back into the program to fund it. Having sampled a bit I will tell you it is very tasty. Hats off to those students, their professors, and their advisers. Or perhaps "cheers" would be more appropriate.

    --
    putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
    1. Re:The Science of Brew Masters by fatphil · · Score: 1

      That's got to be the US. I think science is killing beer. The sahtis of Finland, the koduolu of Estonia, the kamiskais of Lativa, the Kaimiskas of Lithuania, are mostly brewed by people who quite simply don't give a crap about the numbers, and the floccing fuckulation, and they are some of the tastier beers I've tasted. OK, they're fragile, and perhaps could be given a slightly longer shelflife were more science to be applied, but I'm prepared to pay the cost for experiencing their art, as I travel to drink them fresh.

      Where I used to live also had a local college with a brewing course. All the science in the world, and they were still producing terribly flawed beers. I think a prerequisite for such a course is having brewed 10 homebrews, so that you will have learnt to recognise what can go wrong even if you can't explain why it went wrong. You have to feel it first. Science can only help if you have an unthinking feel for what you're doing. (I don't consider things like "practice good hygiene" to be science, that's just common sense.)

      I say this as someone who has won local home-brewing competitions, but has never measured anything with any accuracy at all after my first 2 or 3 brews. (I guess I've done 50+ now.) My gut feel has also lead me to, whilst not technically flawed, horrific brews too, but that happens when you get experimental. I once accidentally made brut champagne! (Which I find horrific.)

      --
      Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
    2. Re:The Science of Brew Masters by plopez · · Score: 1

      I believe in art + science. That seems to work the best. Brewing for yourself is different than running consistent batches in a brew pub or a regular brewery.

      --
      putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
  34. Yeah St. Patricks Day! Someone pick-up the tab! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    St. Patrick's Day is two days away. We've got our Irish Car Bomb recipes. We've got our green hair dye. We've got our pub crawl schedule down pat. But how much should we budget for a night of shamrock-filled partying?

    30 bucks? $50? $100?!

    Cheers!

    http://www.creditnet.com/blog/credit-cards/st-patricks-day-2011

  35. Limerick by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    a crack group of Limerick geeks
    'been working for several weeks
    to bottle a stout
    and make bubbles come out
    just in time for the next Wikileaks

  36. As an Irish person I find this summary hilarious by UbuntuniX · · Score: 1

    "a craic group of lads from the University of Limerick"
    Fixed.

  37. Small note by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The author of TFA seems to be slightly confused. Not all stouts are nitrogenated (in fact most are not) and all stouts are ales, so the comparison is moot.

    Also, the mathematicians are definitely not brewers. They came up with a solution a long time ago that is even better than theirs. Nucleated glassware. But it still misses the whole point of adding nitrogen to the beer. It actually changes in flavor and mouthfeel of the beer. Also as a side note, how long will the coffee filter like material last inside the can without degrading? At present you can (despite popular belief) keep a bottle/can of beer for several years before it starts to heavily stale.

  38. Its All About by DFurno2003 · · Score: 0

    Splitting the beer atom: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0096486/

  39. everything is better while getting head. by Nyder · · Score: 1

    Okay, this article had me at:

    "Mathematicians invented a new method to can and bottle stout beers like Guinness while still getting that satisfying head."

    Most everything is better while getting head. Mainly when it is satisfying. Power to the math dudes!!!!!

    --
    Be seeing you...
  40. Coors is overrated anyway by Buybye · · Score: 1

    AKA Rocky Mountain goat piss.

  41. i'm interested in good head, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    but all head is good. some is just better.