Chemistry of Food Project:
Infographic:
Reflection:
1. How does the ingredient you experimented with affect the food’s overall characteristics? Be specific and discuss the chemical structure of the ingredient and the chemical structures of the aspects of the food the chosen ingredient interacted with as part of your answer.
During my food project I experimented with emulsification. My medium for the experiment was salad dressing. As I added more and more soy lecithin to the dressings the more emulsified they became. The soy lecithin, being my independent variable, changed the two dependent variables: stability of the emulsion and viscosity. Before adding the soy lecithin the dressing was an immiscible substance because of the polarity of the molecules. The vinegar molecules, being hydrophilic, are naturally polar and miscible with water. Whereas the oil molecules are hydrophobic and nonpolar which means they are not miscible with water molecules. The soy lecithin is an emulsifier because it has both a hydrophilic head and a hydrophobic tail, making it able to be miscible with both substances. The non-polar atoms in the hydrophobic head have evenly distributed electrons which leads to symmetry and makes them attracted to other nonpolar atoms, like the oil in the dressing. Then, within the polar charged hydrophilic head of the molecule the oxygen atoms want electrons from other atoms which makes it asymmetrical and only attracted to other hydrophilic molecules: the vinegar. So, with more soy lecithin added to the dressing the more stable the emulsion between oil and vinegar was. The amount of soy lecithin also changed the viscosity of the dressing, making it so that with more lecithin the dressing became more viscous. The emulsion and viscosity are closely related in the results of this experiment. These are the ways in which I found my independent and dependent variables to interact and it was not far off from what I expected.
2. In what way(s) are cooking and doing science similar and in what way(s) are they different? How are a cook and a food scientist similar or different?
By experimenting with food I found that chemistry is much more prevalent in my everyday life than I had realized. A chemist and a cook have similar things to think about and require similar thought processes. In everything a chef cooks there is an element of the unknown within an outcome which is the same for chemical experiments. Although you can be quite precise in your cooking and experimenting it does require deep thinking and predicting. Both a food scientist's process and a cook's process resemble one another. There is a lot of measuring required for the right outcomes. Stoichiometry could be used in both settings as well. Although it wouldn’t work exactly the same as a cook, you can still utilize the basic rules of plugging things in and analyzing the outcomes with using numbers and equations. Perhaps with cooking there is more room for creativity, but you can find ways to make creative adjustments in science experiments too. It has been interesting to learn and grow in my mindset surrounding science and integrating it into my everyday life.
1. How does the ingredient you experimented with affect the food’s overall characteristics? Be specific and discuss the chemical structure of the ingredient and the chemical structures of the aspects of the food the chosen ingredient interacted with as part of your answer.
During my food project I experimented with emulsification. My medium for the experiment was salad dressing. As I added more and more soy lecithin to the dressings the more emulsified they became. The soy lecithin, being my independent variable, changed the two dependent variables: stability of the emulsion and viscosity. Before adding the soy lecithin the dressing was an immiscible substance because of the polarity of the molecules. The vinegar molecules, being hydrophilic, are naturally polar and miscible with water. Whereas the oil molecules are hydrophobic and nonpolar which means they are not miscible with water molecules. The soy lecithin is an emulsifier because it has both a hydrophilic head and a hydrophobic tail, making it able to be miscible with both substances. The non-polar atoms in the hydrophobic head have evenly distributed electrons which leads to symmetry and makes them attracted to other nonpolar atoms, like the oil in the dressing. Then, within the polar charged hydrophilic head of the molecule the oxygen atoms want electrons from other atoms which makes it asymmetrical and only attracted to other hydrophilic molecules: the vinegar. So, with more soy lecithin added to the dressing the more stable the emulsion between oil and vinegar was. The amount of soy lecithin also changed the viscosity of the dressing, making it so that with more lecithin the dressing became more viscous. The emulsion and viscosity are closely related in the results of this experiment. These are the ways in which I found my independent and dependent variables to interact and it was not far off from what I expected.
2. In what way(s) are cooking and doing science similar and in what way(s) are they different? How are a cook and a food scientist similar or different?
By experimenting with food I found that chemistry is much more prevalent in my everyday life than I had realized. A chemist and a cook have similar things to think about and require similar thought processes. In everything a chef cooks there is an element of the unknown within an outcome which is the same for chemical experiments. Although you can be quite precise in your cooking and experimenting it does require deep thinking and predicting. Both a food scientist's process and a cook's process resemble one another. There is a lot of measuring required for the right outcomes. Stoichiometry could be used in both settings as well. Although it wouldn’t work exactly the same as a cook, you can still utilize the basic rules of plugging things in and analyzing the outcomes with using numbers and equations. Perhaps with cooking there is more room for creativity, but you can find ways to make creative adjustments in science experiments too. It has been interesting to learn and grow in my mindset surrounding science and integrating it into my everyday life.
SARS-CoV-2 Project: Role-Play Discussing If Schools Should Reopen in Person After Winter Break
Reflection:
How can the lens of chemistry be used to inform societal practice and policy designed to limit the spread of SARS-CoV-2?
The question of “How can the lens of chemistry be used to inform societal practice and policy designed to limit the spread of SARS-CoV-2?” brings up many interesting things. The global pandemic that we are currently enduring is a major example of societal practice and science combining and trying to work together. I would argue that everything in life has a scientific aspect and a societal/social aspect. With SARS-CoV-2 specifically, the decisions being made within our government have had to be scientifically based. In order for our society to continue running normally and open up, we need a vaccine. There is so much science behind a vaccine but there are also extremely important decisions being made surrounding the societal aspects, like, who gets it first. Through the lens of chemistry you can find that this virus is transmitted through droplets and aerosols, transmitted as an airborne virus, or transmitted from a surface. In order to prevent some droplet and aerosol transmission masks are highly recommended/required. Social distancing slows the likelihood of airborne transmission. These few precautions have become politicized, naturally, and controversial for some. It is very easy for science to become a political issue, we have seen it happen many times. Before I started my project and research I thought that the correlation between science and society was extremely obvious, but as I looked more deeply into our current situation I realized that it is not so straightforward for everyone.
How did your knowledge of science grow through your work on the project?
In this project most of my gained skills were about the understanding of the relation between science and society. Throughout the unit as a whole I did learn a lot about the biological and chemical pieces of SARS-CoV-2. This aided me in my studies of the effect it is having in our community. Some interesting things came up about the controversy within the scientific community which enlightened me on the fact that not all science is always concrete and universally agreed on. In the case of COVID-19 this is not ideal because it shapes the way that scientists deal with it and we need to be on the same page in order to move forward. Overall, I learned more about how complicated the mixture of science and society can be and I am experiencing that on the daily so it was relevant and interesting content.
What were the benefits and downfalls of learning content that would be found in a Biology class and Physics class as well as Chemistry content in order to keep our project relevant to our lives?
The biggest benefit I see to this method is the fact that the content was extremely relevant and therefore more interesting. Due to our learning situation we were unable to do chemistry labs which put a damper on the type of chemistry we were learning. I think that the different topics fit together very seamlessly and I was never questioning the purpose of what we were doing in class. The aspect of our unit with learning and reading scientific papers was very applicable and a positive of this method. I am slightly concerned that this unit did not give us enough chemistry knowledge, especially for someone who has had no previous exposure to chemistry. Overall, I think that for our special situation this semester, the benefits of this method of teaching have outweighed the downsides of it.
The question of “How can the lens of chemistry be used to inform societal practice and policy designed to limit the spread of SARS-CoV-2?” brings up many interesting things. The global pandemic that we are currently enduring is a major example of societal practice and science combining and trying to work together. I would argue that everything in life has a scientific aspect and a societal/social aspect. With SARS-CoV-2 specifically, the decisions being made within our government have had to be scientifically based. In order for our society to continue running normally and open up, we need a vaccine. There is so much science behind a vaccine but there are also extremely important decisions being made surrounding the societal aspects, like, who gets it first. Through the lens of chemistry you can find that this virus is transmitted through droplets and aerosols, transmitted as an airborne virus, or transmitted from a surface. In order to prevent some droplet and aerosol transmission masks are highly recommended/required. Social distancing slows the likelihood of airborne transmission. These few precautions have become politicized, naturally, and controversial for some. It is very easy for science to become a political issue, we have seen it happen many times. Before I started my project and research I thought that the correlation between science and society was extremely obvious, but as I looked more deeply into our current situation I realized that it is not so straightforward for everyone.
How did your knowledge of science grow through your work on the project?
In this project most of my gained skills were about the understanding of the relation between science and society. Throughout the unit as a whole I did learn a lot about the biological and chemical pieces of SARS-CoV-2. This aided me in my studies of the effect it is having in our community. Some interesting things came up about the controversy within the scientific community which enlightened me on the fact that not all science is always concrete and universally agreed on. In the case of COVID-19 this is not ideal because it shapes the way that scientists deal with it and we need to be on the same page in order to move forward. Overall, I learned more about how complicated the mixture of science and society can be and I am experiencing that on the daily so it was relevant and interesting content.
What were the benefits and downfalls of learning content that would be found in a Biology class and Physics class as well as Chemistry content in order to keep our project relevant to our lives?
The biggest benefit I see to this method is the fact that the content was extremely relevant and therefore more interesting. Due to our learning situation we were unable to do chemistry labs which put a damper on the type of chemistry we were learning. I think that the different topics fit together very seamlessly and I was never questioning the purpose of what we were doing in class. The aspect of our unit with learning and reading scientific papers was very applicable and a positive of this method. I am slightly concerned that this unit did not give us enough chemistry knowledge, especially for someone who has had no previous exposure to chemistry. Overall, I think that for our special situation this semester, the benefits of this method of teaching have outweighed the downsides of it.