Please help settle this dispute! The difference between simmering and boiling liquid

[DragonSnaps]

My DF and I are adamant that we each are in the right.

Whenever I'm cooking something on the hob, he will constantly interfere and turn down whatever it is onto the lowest heat setting. He says that it's boiling if there are bubbles in the liquid, no matter how small. In my opinion this is a low simmer, not boiling and it takes longer for things to cook. There is a difference between something being on a low simmer with hardly any bubbles, to full on boiling. Or am I wrong? Or is my DF wrong. Please help.

The scientific difference between the temperature of Boiling and Simmering is insignificant. In terms of cooking its a huge waste of energy to have a 'rolling boil' to gain a few seconds quicker cooking time.

Literally a waste of money to use a rolling boil, your just paying to evaporate money water.

IMHO a simmer is when small specific spots of water are at 100 degrees, the point where each small bubble is. At a full rolling boil a significantly large proportion, of not all, of the water is at 100 degrees due to the size and quantity of bubbles and general water agitation.

In cooking I use a simmer when I do not want agitation in the food that I am cooking, or much evapouration of the liquid. I use a rolling boil when I do want agitation eg throwing pasta around so it doesnt stick together, or evapouration eg reducing a sauce

Anyone who interferes when I am cooking gets to finish the cooking job!

PS simmer
ˈsɪmə/Submit
verb
1.
(of water or food that is being heated) stay just below boiling point while bubbling gently.

I agree with this video...

www.thekitchn.com/videos/EH8Tm2e3

There is a difference between science terms and culinary.

Simmers and boils are used for different things and give different results. If you simmer pasta or rice it has a much greater chance of ending up a big lump. If you boil stock it is much more likely to burn or spill over.

You are right. Simmering; the water is at 180-190 degrees Fahrenheit and there are bubbles gently breaking the surface. Boiling, on the other hand; water is at 212 degrees Fahrenheit at sea level and bubbles are vigorously breaking.

That’s why things are simmered. Stews would be tough if you boiled them.

Hope that helps - used Fahrenheit but could convert to Celsius.

Simmering is when you can make a cup of tea, boiling is when it'll overflow and put out the gas if you don't turn it down.

www.google.co.uk/amp/amp.myrecipes.com/how-to/cooking-questions/difference-boil-simmer

Op, here is the difference between boiling and simmering

Boiling point is boiling point, it doesn't change with how fast things are boiling.

Both tea and pasta need a rolling boil. Or roiling boil, I think, actually.

Should say black tea. Other teas need different temperatures.

Here's a link, hope it's helpful. Fwiw I don't like people who interfere by taking over. Too many cooks spoil the broth.

www.finecooking.com/article/whats-the-difference-between-a-simmer-and-a-boil#

He is BU because the cardinal rule is YOU DON'T MESS WITH ANYTHING IF YOU AREN'T THE COOK.

I will (barely) tolerate DP questioning me with, "don't you think you should turn the gas down" but he gets the full force of my wrath if he touches it himself.

He needs to but out.

Also it's not always about the temperature, those big bubbles stop things like pasta from sticking to the bottom of the pan. It bobs vegetables about so they're evenly cooked.

Bubbles. Big for boiling. Small for simmering.

The temperature is the same in boiling and simmering water ( in any practical sense). So food does not inherantly cook quicker in boiling water than simmering.

However, the bigger boiling bubbles help keep food evenly mixed, which can assist in cooking, and simmering has the risk that it can go off the boil, by cooling action of evaporation, heat exchange with the environment and the food being added not yet at 100 degrees C.

So both right to certain degree, water does not keep heating after boiling point, all the energy you put in converts the water to steam... so keeping it boiling vigorously does not in itself cook stuff quicker. But if you turn it right down, add other ingredients it can go off the boil, thus taking longer for food to cook.

Tell him to either cook from the start or butt out of your cooking. It's not being helpful, it's interfering.

Whether it is rolling boil or simmer must depend on heat transferred to base of pan. So perhaps the difference is HOT setting - heat being transferred quickly and, say it's a pan of stew the heat isn't dissipated quickly and the food burns on the bottom of the pan, Simmer setting - less heat being transferred, although water temp would be similar, food cooked through gently, stew doesn't stick.
Also HOT setting lots of heat being transferred so more agitation, more steam, as mentioned above, more chance of boiling dry, would that mean loss of vitamins in veg, I don't know.

Whenever I'm cooking something on the hob, he will constantly interfere and turn down whatever it is onto the lowest heat setting. My DH does this too. He's a physicist, so he could doubtless drone on for England about temperatures. But if I'm cooking I just tell him not to interfere. Cooking is an art as well as a science, and if you're in charge you're in charge, end of.

In cooking I use a simmer when I do not want agitation in the food that I am cooking, or much evaporation of the liquid. I use a rolling boil when I do want agitation eg throwing pasta around so it doesn't stick together, or evaporation eg reducing a sauce

^^This.

You don't need everything on the same heat setting. This is what I'm trying to convey to my DF. He cooks things just on the lowest heat setting, but it's not always best, for example rice, as mentioned by a pp.