🚀 go-pugleaf

> I don't know that the term "heat absorbtion ratio' has much meaning here.
> The problem is realy pretty straight forward :  The amount of energy
> absorbed would be a rate problem.

Predictions of ratios (of heat deposited by microwaves in two sbstances) are
usually less demanding than predictions absolute values of heats. That is
why I am using them. The ratios are often not affected by systematic errors
(suppose masses are wrong by +10%, etc.) The flux density inside the oven
does not affect the ratio (mathematical cancelling) but it does affect the
heat deposited in each substance.

By the way, we often forget that specific heats used to be ratios before
they were turned into dimensional quantities. (In terms of how much less
time it takes to heat one gram of something in comparison with water, under
identical deposition rates.)

> ... , you are putting the horse before the cart. Why try to predict (the
> math can only be very involved) when empirical results are much more
> interesting.  Especially for students !  It realy does seem to put the
> 'traditional' method backwards. What good are predictions, except to test
> a theory.

This statement is worth discussing but not under the "microwave cooking"
subject. This is a great and interesting topic.

              Ludwik Kowalski    kowalski@apollo.montclair.edu