Settle the Debate: Boiling Time of Water at Different Temperatures on Stove

[tammikec]

Here's the issue in question. Let's say you had two equally sized pans filled with equal amounts of water. The only difference between them is the water in one pan is 50 degrees while the other is 100 degrees. Next, they are put on the stove with equal flame applied, would the pan with 100 degree water come to a boil first or would they both come to a boil at the same time.

 

[Hootenanny]

Welcome to the Forums,

The 100^oC pan would boil first. Do you require an explantion or is a yay or nay enough?

 

[ApeXaviour]

The pan at 100 degrees (celcius or farenheit) would come to boil first. Classical heat equation Q=C*dT.
They both have the same mass and are both water so their heat capacity is the same. The heat energy applied to both (from the flame) is the same. So the temperature should go up at a similar rate in each. Since the 100 degree pan has distance to travel in this regard, it will reach boiling temperature first.

 

[Cyrus]

No, no equations necessary, you can solve this without knowing any science!

 

[Hootenanny]

No, no equations necessary, you can solve this without knowing any science!

I feel a practical investigation coming on...

 

[Cyrus]

Bring It Baby!

 

[Cyrus]

If they were both 100F, they would both take the same amount of time to boil, agreed?

So if the one that is 50F has to first go to 100F, the only way it can be faster is if it takes negative time to boil from 50 to 100, and that ant going to happen. See, no equations!

 

[DaveC426913]

Here's the issue in question. Let's say you had two equally sized pans filled with equal amounts of water. The only difference between them is the water in one pan is 50 degrees while the other is 100 degrees. Next, they are put on the stove with equal flame applied, would the pan with 100 degree water come to a boil first or would they both come to a boil at the same time.

Not only is it intuitively obvious that the pan with near-boiling water will boil first, but you can prove that it makes no sense otherwise.

Say a pan50F takes 10 minutes to boil.
We'll postulate that pan100F also takes 10 minutes.

So, now what happens when pan50F reaches 100F? It will now take 10 minutes from that point to boil. Which means it actually took 20 minutes in total. Which would mean 10=20!

Which is impossible, therefore the initial postulate can't be true.

 

[Gokul43201]

If they were both 100F, they would both take the same amount of time to boil, agreed?

So if the one that is 50F has to first go to 100F, the only way it can be faster is if it takes negative time to boil from 50 to 100, and that ant going to happen. See, no equations!

I've got one word for you: Mpemba!

 

[Cyrus]

I've got one for you, prove it!

 

[berkeman]

No, no. It's a trick quesion. The OP craftily didn't specify whether the temperatures were in C or F. The 100C pan is already boiling before it is put on the stove, so neither answer is correct!

 

[NoTime]

No, no. It's a trick quesion. The OP craftily didn't specify whether the temperatures were in C or F. The 100C pan is already boiling before it is put on the stove, so neither answer is correct!

Boiling usually means that the water is turning into water vapor at a great rate.
At a lower rate its called simmering.
In any event 100c water isn't boiling without a heat input cause it would get less than 100c instantly.

Err, in a pan it's going to get colder instantly anyway

 

[Cyrus]

Water boils at a temperature slightly greater than 100C, despite popular belief. It has to be >100C for nucleation and bubbles to form.

"Simmering" is not a proper term, as far as I am aware.

 

[NoTime]

My speel checker finds "Simmering"

If you want to get picky then it boils at room temp.
Otherwise, it would never evaporate

 

[Cyrus]

Ehh? That's equally wrong as well...water vaporizes(well, evaporates) at room temp, it does NOT boil.

 

[NoTime]

It's all about the semantics, a room, at room temp, does have some heat

v., boiled, boil·ing, boils.
To change from a liquid to a vapor by the application of heat

 

[Cyrus]

No, its not. Arg...you need to get a book on thermodynamics.

Boiling is for a solid-liquid interface.

Evaporation occurs at the liquid-vapor interface

Now, no more misuse of words.

 

[NoTime]

solid-liquid

Is that an oxymoron, or what?

 

[Cyrus]

What...?

Do you think it all boils instantly into a vapor?

 

[NoTime]

I don't know what planet your thermodynamics book came from, but ...

Most people think that what occurs at the interface between liquid and solid is melting.

 

[Cyrus]

Ah, sorry. The solid is the pan, the liquid is the water.

Better?

 

[NoTime]

I'm better. I needed a good laugh

 

[Cyrus]

Yeah, that was funny...do you see the difference now? They are not the same.

 

[NoTime]

 

[Cyrus]

They are not the same, what don't you get?

 

[DaveC426913]

I confess cyrus - not that this needs to be beaten to death any more - but it seems your're making the issue even more confusing.

"Evaporation occurs at the liquid-vapor interface"

"Boiling is for a solid-liquid interface."
"The solid is the pan, the liquid is the water."

By this, you seem to be indicating (and I'm sure you don't mean to) that the pan itself is boiling into the water.

 

[Doc Al]

No, its not. Arg...you need to get a book on thermodynamics.

Boiling is for a solid-liquid interface.

Evaporation occurs at the liquid-vapor interface

Now, no more misuse of words.

Get a grip, man!

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/kinetic/vappre.html#c3"

 

[WhyIsItSo]

Water boils at a temperature slightly greater than 100C, despite popular belief. It has to be >100C for nucleation and bubles to form.

Actually, I believe it is 99.97C at 1 atm.

 

[WhyIsItSo]

No, its not. Arg...you need to get a book on thermodynamics.

Boiling is for a solid-liquid interface.

Boiling is the liquid-vapor phase change.

Freezing is the solid-liquid phase change

See enthalpy of fusion, enthalpy of vaporization

Evaporation occurs at the liquid-vapor interface

Now, no more misuse of words.

Hmmm

 

[Cyrus]

Get a grip, man!

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/kinetic/vappre.html#c3"

Yes, thank you! A link!

See, NOT the same thing.

 

[Cyrus]

Boiling is the liquid-vapor phase change.

Freezing is the solid-liquid phase change

See enthalpy of fusion, enthalpy of vaporization


Hmmm

No, that's not at all what I'm talking about.

 

[ZapperZ]

Yes, thank you! A link!

See, NOT the same thing.

I don't know what you read in the link that doc al gave, but it clearly contradicted what you are saying.

Zz.

 

[Cyrus]

Really? Arggg...hehe let me type what I have in my book.

 

[Cyrus]

Evaporation occurs at the liquid-vapor interface when the vapor pressure is less than the saturation pressure of the liquid at a given temperature.

Boiling, on the other hand, occurs at the solid-liquid interface when a liquid is brought into contact with a surface maintained at a temperature T_s sufficiently above the saturation temperature T_{sat} of the liquid. The boiling process is characterized by the rapid motion of vapor bubbles that form at the solid-liquid interface, detatch from the surface when they reach a certain size, and attempt to rise to the free surface of the liquid.

That is why, boiling, is not exactly the same effect as evaporation, IMO.

One involves nucleation, the other does not.

 

[Gokul43201]

I've got one for you, prove it!

Prove what? Mpemba? Sure! Let me know when you're visiting these parts.

People: Cyrus is pointing out that while evaporation is a phase change that occurs at the liquid-vapor interface, boiling is the same phase change which occurs predominantly at a solid-liquid interface (the "interface" being in the real world, not on a phase diagram). To be correct, there is some bubble nucleation within the liquid itself, arising from density fluctuations, but for most common vessels (nothing that has a special surface treatment), the majority of bubbles do nucleate on the container walls.

Edit: Was typing this up before I saw Cyrus' last post, in which he finally decides not to be enigmatic about his earlier post.

 

[Cyrus]

Prove what? Mpemba? Sure! Let me know when you're visiting these parts.

I was just giving you a hard time, I know its true!

 

[NoTime]

the majority of bubbles do nucleate on the container walls.

In my experience, the bubbles nucleate at the location of the heat source.
Not quite the same thing.
Which makes sense since that's where the energy is to generate the phase change.

In the case of a microwave oven, you can get some peculiar results.

Do you think it all boils instantly into a vapor?

Yep!
At least judging by the number of cups water I've mopped up off the bottom of the microwave after they explosively emptied.

 

[Cyrus]

They did that because the microwaves do not agitate it like an open heat source. They vibrate the polar molecules. When you pick the cup up, you agitate it and it rapidly nucleates.

 

[NoTime]

They did that because the microwaves do not agitate it like an open heat source. They vibrate the polar molecules. When you pick the cup up, you agitate it and it rapidly nucleates.

At least you agree that the entire mass got heated to boiling all at once.

I'm so glad they did it before I picked them up.

 

[Cyrus]

Did you touch them or add anything to it?

 

[Hootenanny]

Do you reckon we've scared the OP off?

 

[WhyIsItSo]

In my experience, the bubbles nucleate at the location of the heat source.
Not quite the same thing.
Which makes sense since that's where the energy is to generate the phase change.

In the case of a microwave oven, you can get some peculiar results.

Yep!
At least judging by the number of cups water I've mopped up off the bottom of the microwave after they explosively emptied.

Both of your comments are related issues.

In the first case (and I recently had cause to research this extensively) we need to be careful with the term "nucleation". It is not specific to boiling, but is also a factor in the process of freezing.

In the case of where the bubbles are forming, yes, you might often observe that they seem to mostly occur at the bottom of the pot. Try it, however, with something that transmits the heat more evenly, and you will see a lot more bubbles forming on the sides.

Now that I see what Cyrus was getting at, I can say he is correct. The nucleation is occurring because the temperature of the water is right about at boiling point, and the air bubbles (and even imperfections in the surface of the pot) make it easier for vaporization to occur. In effect, this is "seeding" the formation of vapor bubbles.

In your microwave, you are probably boiling your water in a glazed cup. This cup has very smooth surfaces, I'm willing to bet, and provides little to assist in the formation of vapor bubbles. Hence, the water can superheat - be hotter than the boiling point without actually boiling. When you add your coffee, spoon, sugar, whatever, you introduce something which seeds nucleation; likely in the form of tiny air bubbles. Since there is far more energy than the minimum required to boil the water, this event violently coverts this excess energy into vaporization; thus the "volcano" effect.

This is the same thing for supercooling; again, it is because there is nothing to seed nucleation. Pure water, undisturbed in a smooth container, will not freeze until something like -45C (not sure of the exact number).

 

[NoTime]

Did you touch them or add anything to it?

The usual scenerio was that I heard a whoomp.
The microwave shuts down and water starts dripping out the door.
Took to setting the time a lot lower after it happened a few times.
I tried watching with the light on to see if I could catch it in the act, but the water just boiled in the cup.

The watched pot never explodes

Try it, however, with something that transmits the heat more evenly, and you will see a lot more bubbles forming on the sides.

I was more referring to the fact that only the part of the pot in contact with the heater bubbles. Sure, if you heat it evenly then it all bubbles. You do need energy to make this happen.

Hence, the water can superheat - be hotter than the boiling point without actually boiling.

I'm sure this is what's happening, when the conditions are just right.
I have seen the bubble up effect from adding stuff.
That's just a minor fizz.
The thing I'm talking about will empty the cup!
You can hear it go off too.

It would also happen with styrofoam cups, not just glazed.

I've never seen the newer turntable models do this, probably too much vibration.

 

[ddavis05]

superheating water

so, is it possible to superheat water in a completely smooth container free of impurities until it simply vaporizes without it ever boiling?

 

[IMP]

If the pan with 100 degree water was at the bottom of Death Valley, and the pan with the 50 degree water was at the top of Mt. Everest (but with equal ambient air temperatures), it might be a close race...