Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by mrpg on Thursday May 09 2019, @05:38AM   Printer-friendly
from the weren't-we-secular? dept.

Phys.org:

A team of researchers from Osaka University and Kirin Holdings Company, Limited demonstrated that the texture formation in a pint glass of Guinness beer is induced by flow of a bubble-free fluid film flowing down along the wall of the glass, a world first. This phenomenon is found to be analogous to roll waves commonly observed in water sliding downhill on a rainy day. Their research results were published in Scientific Reports.

Guinness beer, a dark stout beer, is pressurized with nitrogen gas. When it is poured into a pint glass, small-diameter bubbles (only 1/10 the size of those in carbonated drinks such as soda and carbonated water) disperse throughout the entire glass and the texture motion of the bubble swarm moves downward.

[...] Because the opaque and dark-colored Guinness beer obstructs physical observation in a glass, and computation using supercomputers is necessary to conduct numerical simulation of flows including a vast number of small bubbles in the beer, the team of researchers led by Tomoaki Watamura produced transparent "pseudo-Guinness fluid" by using light particles and tap water. They filmed the movement of liquid with a high-speed video camera, using laser-induced-fluorescence in order to accurately measure the movement of fluid. In addition, using molecular tags, they visualized the irregular movement of the fluid.

Beer is already proof God loves us and wants to be happy.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Touché) by krishnoid on Thursday May 09 2019, @06:26AM (11 children)

    by krishnoid (1156) on Thursday May 09 2019, @06:26AM (#841215)

    Researching fluid dynamics of Guinness at a level of detail that deserves an Ig Nobel prize nomination? Doing the Lord's work, they are.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Touché=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Touché' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 3, Informative) by c0lo on Thursday May 09 2019, @07:21AM (9 children)

    by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Thursday May 09 2019, @07:21AM (#841231) Journal

    Researching fluid dynamics of Guinness at a level of detail that deserves an Ig Nobel prize nomination?

    Ig Nobel prize [wikipedia.org] is awarded for "unusual or trivial achievements in scientific research".
    The only thing unusual is that the study used the behavior of nitrogen bubbles in Guinness as an example where their research apply (and, likely, got the money for the study from a beverage company that doesn't even produce Guinness).

    The study has not conducted using Guinness beer and the results has larger applicability than the Guinness beer

    Lead author Watamura says, "There are a large number of small objects in nature, such as fine rock particles transported from rivers to the sea and microorganisms living in lakes and ponds. Comprehending and regulating the movement of small objects is important in various industrial processes as well. Our research results will be useful in understanding and controlling flows of bubbles and particles used in industrial processes as well as protein crystallization and cell cultivation used in the field of life science."

    The phenomenon is related with the Boycott Effect [nature.com] (observed and communicated in 1920) - the sedimentation of small-enough corpuscles is a lot faster in the vicinity of inclined surfaces than in vertical columns [youtube.com].

    Doing the Lord's work, they are.

    False. At the very best, the works is Kirin Holdings Company Ltd's - does not have any relation with the Lord.

    --
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
    • (Score: 3, Informative) by Bot on Thursday May 09 2019, @08:57AM (8 children)

      by Bot (3902) on Thursday May 09 2019, @08:57AM (#841254) Journal

      BTW, when I say "oh my God", I claim ownership of Him (among some other interpretations arguably more fitting), so you should make everybody point out what they really mean when they utter that phrase, or risk being the usual content-with-half-measures atheist.

      Anyway today I learned that guinness, by featuring added gases, is one degree of separation closer to coca cola than I thought.

      --
      Account abandoned.
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 09 2019, @10:03AM (5 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 09 2019, @10:03AM (#841273)

        BTW, when I say "oh my God", I claim ownership of Him

        For the lack of a + Pedanticaly exact, I needed to resort on an + Informative

        • (Score: 2) by Bot on Thursday May 09 2019, @10:45AM (4 children)

          by Bot (3902) on Thursday May 09 2019, @10:45AM (#841283) Journal

          Surely you meant "+1 Pedantically...", and no, I don't call you Shirley.

          --
          Account abandoned.
          • (Score: 2) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Thursday May 09 2019, @02:05PM (3 children)

            by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us (6553) on Thursday May 09 2019, @02:05PM (#841328) Journal

            What if the AC's name was actually Shirley?

            --
            This sig for rent.
            • (Score: 2) by Bot on Thursday May 09 2019, @04:15PM (2 children)

              by Bot (3902) on Thursday May 09 2019, @04:15PM (#841380) Journal

              I call her anonymous cowardette, as a matter of principle, then.

              --
              Account abandoned.
              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 09 2019, @10:53PM (1 child)

                by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 09 2019, @10:53PM (#841585)

                But what if Shirley was a guy [wikipedia.org]?

                (Funny story about him: Povich's first name accounted for his listing in Who's Who of American Women in 1958. He recalled in his autobiography that "Shirley" was a common name for boys where he came from, but many who read his column thought Povich was a woman; in jest, Walter Cronkite even proposed marriage to "her.")

                • (Score: 2) by Bot on Friday May 10 2019, @08:12AM

                  by Bot (3902) on Friday May 10 2019, @08:12AM (#841756) Journal

                  I'll insensitively assume her sex in retaliation for the cowardice.

                  --
                  Account abandoned.
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 09 2019, @10:34AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 09 2019, @10:34AM (#841281)

        Anyway today I learned that guinness, by featuring added gases, is one degree of separation closer to coca cola than I thought.

        And, unlike the carbon dioxide in Coke, the gas in Guinness is bloody nitrogen..

        Back in the '80s I brewed up a batch of stout to as near as damn it their recipe, and used a live sample of their own yeast (mumble mumble mumble...sources...mumble mumble), bottled in in 1l flip top bottles (amber, ex Pelican de Pelforth Brune..this was back before the sad day that Heineken got their hands on the brewery.) primed with some sugar to bottle condition it, and then sat back for a couple of months.

        Factoring in that there were differences in the water supply, brewing techniques etc, I'd still say that the sharper tasting beer that is produced by gassing it with good old carbon dioxide is infinitely preferable to the nitrogen gassed stuff. It also helped that the stuff clocked in at something like 8% ABV..

        The easiest way to taste the difference is to try normal Guinness, then try Guinness Foreign Extra Stout (which should still have some carbon dioxide gassing it...that is, unless they've fscked with the Foreign Extra as well, in which case, you might not taste much of a difference).

        I like stouts, but the only time I'll drink Guinness now is if I'm out, someone is offering, and there is nothing else on tap in the pub, it has become the lowest common denominator of beers that I'll drink, available everywhere, tastes the same almost everywhere...downside is that a hell of a lot of pubs are pretty shitty when it comes to keeping their pipes/lines clean, the lack of carbon dioxide in the stuff means it isn't as acidic as normal beers so it's very easy to end up with a bad pint of the stuff thanks to all those micro-organisms who've heard that Guinness is good for them that might have been put off otherwise.

        Still, Guinness adding nitrogen to beer (which they've been doing since the 50's/60's) is not as bad as the manufacturer of a well-known cider brand in the UK which adds shit like sweeteners to some of their output..and still has the audacity to try call it a cider.

        [all this talk of Guinness, stouts, etc. etc. .... looks like it's time to break out the old home beer brewing gear from storage...will make a change from making wines and ciders]

      • (Score: 2) by krishnoid on Thursday May 09 2019, @07:49PM

        by krishnoid (1156) on Thursday May 09 2019, @07:49PM (#841502)

        I guess being that pedantic is one way to keep the Robot Devil at bay. Or maybe he likes that level of pedantry in Robot Hell. Hard to tell, maybe just sit back and enjoy the song [youtube.com].

  • (Score: 2) by bob_super on Thursday May 09 2019, @05:06PM

    by bob_super (1357) on Thursday May 09 2019, @05:06PM (#841415)

    > Researching fluid dynamics of Guinness

    Yup. Some fields of research spend their time worrying about grants and their future.

    Some researchers just know that the future will be fine ... and smooth ... and just overall pleasant.

    Think about it before you choose a career, kids!