[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Nucleation doesn't only require a foreign particle. Nucleation by movement is often observed when supercooled water freezes as frost on a car roof.

Is it foreign particle and movement, or
Is it foreign particle or movement,
Which is required for nucleation? Your statement is a bit ambiguous.

Microwave absorption does not depend on convection so is less likely to invoke boiling nucleation as the water is heated relatively uniformly throughout its bulk or even top-down, unlike a conventional cooker.

Standing wave in microwave oven produces non-uniform heating, that's why rotating base is provided in the first place.
Why infrared stove fails to produce superheated water?

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

At this point, is there anyone still doubt that there's a mechanism in superheated water by microwave which is not available in other heating methods?

[Bored chemist]

there's a mechanism in superheated water by microwave which is not available in other heating methods?

You have not provided sufficient evidence to convince anyone of that claim.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

there's a mechanism in superheated water by microwave which is not available in other heating methods?

You have not provided sufficient evidence to convince anyone of that claim.

Sufficiency of evidence can be different from one person to another. I'm pretty convinced by this experiment.

Now I've done recording the experiments. These are what I did.
1. Heat demineralized water in the borosilicate beaker in microwave oven until some bubbles are formed. Then test if it's superheated using a steel fork.
2. Reheat the water using microwave oven, and repeat the test.
3. Reheat the water using infrared ceramic stove until some bubbles are formed, and repeat the test.
4. Reheat the water using infrared ceramic stove until some bubbles are formed, and repeat the test.
5. Compare the results to determine if they are produced by the same phenomenon.

Now I've done editing and uploaded it.

Comparison with Infrared Stove

What kind of evidence is sufficient to convince you?
What's the evidence that you have against it?

Why infrared stove fails to produce superheated water?

[Bored chemist]

What kind of evidence is sufficient to convince you?

Repeatable evidence.

Superheating is a hit-and-miss phenomenon.
Even in circumstances likely  to promote it, there's no guarantee it will happen.
So you failing to see it in one kitchen experiment is probably a coincidence.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Superheating is a hit-and-miss phenomenon.

No. I can produce it consistently using microwave, 10 out of 10 if needed.
What I need are demineralized water and smooth surfaced glass container.

[Bored chemist]

Superheating is a hit-and-miss phenomenon.

No. I can produce it consistently using microwave, 10 out of 10 if needed.
What I need are demineralized water and smooth surfaced glass container.

Then why can't you produce it with an IR source?
Is it because you are only heating the bottom of the jug (The IR won't go through the glass) rather than the bulk of the water (as you do with microwaves)?

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Superheating is a hit-and-miss phenomenon.

No. I can produce it consistently using microwave, 10 out of 10 if needed.
What I need are demineralized water and smooth surfaced glass container.

Then why can't you produce it with an IR source?
Is it because you are only heating the bottom of the jug (The IR won't go through the glass) rather than the bulk of the water (as you do with microwaves)?

Borosilicate transmits infrared light quite well.


Water absorbs some infrared spectrum pretty well, although it's only a small portion of the spectrum.

[Bored chemist]

OK, so. looking at the video, the IR hob seems to be glowing red hot.
It must be somewhere near 450C or 700K (I really don't have a better estimate than that.
And if we consider the emission spectrum from that, we can use something like this
https://www.spectralcalc.com/blackbody_calculator/blackbody.php
to calculate it
And we get a result like this

BBR 700K.JPG (40.05 kB . 618x395 - viewed 1822 times)

So we can see that practically none of the radiation is shorter than about 2 microns (where it would get through the glass jug).
And the peak is at about 4 microns- which is where your spectrum of borosilicate shows that it absorbs strongly.


And this is why I keep saying you should learn some science.

[alancalverd]

At this point, is there anyone still doubt that there's a mechanism in superheated water by microwave which is not available in other heating methods?

No. What you have demonstrated is that microwave heating of very clean water in very clean glass may not have sufficient nucleation triggers to prevent superheating.

[quote ]Why infrared stove fails to produce superheated water?[/quote] Because the infrared stove heats the bottom of the container and thus generates much stronger convection currents than are present with microwave heating. Convection = movement = nucleation.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

I find this site quite informative in explaining infrared stove. I used ceramic type.
https://turkish.ceramicx.com/information/teknik-destek/why-infrared/

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

So we can see that practically none of the radiation is shorter than about 2 microns (where it would get through the glass jug).
And the peak is at about 4 microns- which is where your spectrum of borosilicate shows that it absorbs strongly.


And this is why I keep saying you should learn some science.

Do you think gas stove will give better result?

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

No. What you have demonstrated is that microwave heating of very clean water in very clean glass may not have sufficient nucleation triggers to prevent superheating.

Why infrared stove fails to produce superheated water? Because the infrared stove heats the bottom of the container and thus generates much stronger convection currents than are present with microwave heating. Convection = movement = nucleation.

Have you seen my videos, especially where superheating and de-superheating occur at once?

[Bored chemist]

I find this site quite informative

Then, since that site tells you the IR from a ceramic heater is mainly near 3 to 10 microns, why did you say that borosilicate is transparent- even though you showed a spectrum which tells you it is opaque ?

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

I find this site quite informative

Then, since that site tells you the IR from a ceramic heater is mainly near 3 to 10 microns, why did you say that borosilicate is transparent- even though you showed a spectrum which tells you it is opaque ?

Transparency is not a binary value. Some of the infrared radiation can pass through the glass. Although it's not clear yet what happens to the rest of the spectrum. How much is reflected instead of absorbed?

There is a ceramic plate between the heat source and the beaker. The spectrum would be different than black body radiation

Do you think gas stove will give better result?

[Bored chemist]

How much is reflected instead of absorbed?

And again...
Why do you refuse to learn science?

The answer is "not much" that's why I ignored it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fresnel_equations#Normal_incidence

[Bored chemist]

The spectrum would be different than black body radiation

How different?

In particular...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirchhoff%27s_law_of_thermal_radiation

Again it would be helpful if you learned the science that was available a hundred years ago.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

And again...
Why do you refuse to learn science?

You should answer it yourself.

The answer is "not much" that's why I ignored it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fresnel_equations#

Radiation from the left side of the heater comes with high incident angle before it reaches the right side of the beaker, and vice versa.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

How different?

The ceramic plate filters out some wavelengths.

Again it would be helpful if you learned the science that was available a hundred years ago.

When was the microwave oven invented?

Do you think gas stove will give better result?

[Bored chemist]

When was the microwave oven invented?

1955
On the other hand, Kirchhoff's radiation laws were published in 1860.