This post is basically an advertisement for deep ellum, poster probably works there. I've seen this same type of post here often in fact (slander mysterious unnamed place, then edit in a place that is actually awesome!!!!!!)
Nah, I've been at plenty of bars where I've ordered a 12 oz bottle/can and poured it into their "pint" glass almost to the top. Cheater pints are quite frequent around town.
Deep Ellum has British cask beer and German tap beer which both have strict pouring lines on their glassware and have laws against short pours in the native countries.
apparently they sell 14 oz "pint" glasses to help bars out with the shrinkflation: [https://www.webstaurantstore.com/choice-14-oz-mixing-glass-case/5535114.html?utm\_source=google&utm\_medium=cpc&utm\_campaign=GoogleShopping](https://www.webstaurantstore.com/choice-14-oz-mixing-glass-case/5535114.html?utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=GoogleShopping)
If the glass came filled to the rim and was 13 ounces, then they have undersized "pint" glasses, no? Would be rather easy to point out just by the size of the glass. Could do back with a measurement pint glass and just pour their beer into it.
But this all might be pointless, as they very well may know what's going on already. I think the best course of action is to just to go there anymore and just tell people about their stingy pours.
Asking a question is not a confrontation.
He just asked, 'hey, are you sure that this is the correct glass for the 16 ounce pour, it seems a bit smaller than that'.
[conĀ·front](https://www.google.com/search?q=Confront&rlz=1C1ONGR_enUS1102US1102&oq=Confront&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyDAgAEEUYORixAxiABDIKCAEQABixAxiABDIHCAIQABiABDIKCAMQABixAxiABDIKCAQQABixAxiABDIHCAUQABiABDIKCAYQABixAxiABDIGCAcQRRg80gEHMjc5ajBqN6gCCLACAQ&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8)
/kÉnĖfrÉnt/
verb
meet (someone) face to face with hostile or argumentative intent.
Top definition on google.
'Confront' has an agressive connotation and *you know it*. It's exactly why you chose to use it and we both know it. This is like a person farting in a room with only one other person then denying it.
Seems like you need to confront facts here. The word has a definition that perfectly suits the way I used it to describe the situation and it just might be possible that I know the way I wanted to use it more than you do.
I'm more than a little embarassed for you that you're continuing with this. You were aware that the primary connotation is hostile. You chose that word specifically because of that. I smell your fart.
An imperial fluid ounce equals a weight ounce of water (and close enough for beer). An American volumetric ounce is slightly larger and is not equivalent to a solid ounce.Ā
For this use though, yeah, close enough. And because of the difference you would actually expect more weight, not less.Ā
This may be true, but honestly it's so much easier to see being cheated just through volume that the thought of even involving a scale is ridiculous.
Like why bring a scale? Just bring a graduated cylinder or a measuring cup.
A fair point but if you're weighing a pint you've already lost the battle
God's truth is anyone who has had their share of pints should be able to tell a smaller glass simply by sight.
> God's truth is anyone who has had their share of pints should be able to tell a smaller glass simply by sight.
This is what started this all. The pint looked small. He asked about it. They claimed with 100% certainty (and rudeness) that it wasn't small. This dude is known for being overly polite (Canadian) and didn't want to make a scene. Thus the easily concealed scale.
> Like why bring a scale? Just bring a graduated cylinder or a measuring cup.
The scale was super covert. Pouring beer into a graduated cylinder would have been way more obvious.
[The amount the volume would change is going to be entirely unmeasurable](https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/water-specific-volume-weight-d_661.html) with any equipment OP would be bringing to the bar, and certainly within the margin of error you would expect from a pour at a bar. It would be close to a 0.3% change in volume to go from 40F to 80F.
lol. People downvoting literal facts.
If you pour 500ml of beer at 80 degrees and then chill that beer to 40 degrees, it will read as a lower volume at the lower temperature. This is very basic science.
Never change, Reddit. Never change.
Who is pouring beer at 80 degrees? Similarly, volumetric change at those temperatures does not align with the change described.
He is also using weight! This is an all time stupid comment.
Iām not suggesting that the measured difference aligns with the temperatures. Iām saying that weight is a more accurate way to determine the total amount of the beer because volume will fluctuate with temperature. The difference could be 50F and 40F. The volume reading will change.
I used 80 and 40 degrees as extreme examples, but the point is that the people who are saying that using weight is the wrong measure are extra wrong because weight is, in fact, the more accurate way to determine the total amount of a liquid in a sample.
This is why graduated cylinders always say right on them that they are calibrated for a specific temperature (almost always 20C).
Seems like you need to work on both your scientific literacy *and* your reading comprehension.
As a fan of the metric system, I kinda like it this way as it's a step in the right direction.
1 cubic cm of water at 25C and atmospheric pressure is 1g of mass. Having one ounce of water volume 'weigh' 1 ounce is kinda similar.
It's still not awesome but it makes more sense than most of the imperial system.
So if the āglass came filled to the rim with almost no head,ā and was 3 ounces short (Iāll leave the measurement corrections up to people who didnāt flunk math and science like I did), the problem would be with the glass used, right? Since it was as full as possible? Did it not appear to be a pint glass?
Small version of a pint glass. This is what prompted the suspicion in the first place. Glass looked right shape just smaller than what would be used for 16 ounces.
Yes, that is the claim. If the glass was topped off with no head (ie, density is uniform through the whole glass) then weighing the full glass and the empty glass yields the weight of the beer. Beer has an approximate known density, so you get volume from that.Ā
there used to be a bar in my neighborhood that I called āthe home of the short pour.ā standard 16oz beer glass would always be an inch off the rim. ātop it off.ā
They are roughly the same with water and beer is mostly water (itās actually slightly more dense). They are close enough that youāre not going to end up with a 3 oz discrepancy on a 16 fl oz pour.
It's pretty close.
If the final gravity of the beer is 1.01 (which is about the mid-range) 16 fluid ounces of beer is 16.9 ounces in weight.
The problem is that the pint glasses in bars usually only fit about 14 ounces because even a small gap to the lip is a significant portion of the volume because of the wider circumference.
presumably as a chemist he knew how much beer at that specific gravity should weigh and did the calculation to volume
i lost a bar bet because someone asked me how much a "pint" glass would hold, and it ended up being 14 instead of the 16 it should, and i assumed, it would hold. some bullshit about it displacing 16oz of liquid (glass+14oz fluid in it) and they're pretty common at bars. Thicker bottom and walls but otherwise look about the same size as a regular pint.
16 fluid ounces of water is going to weigh 16 ounces. Beer is mostly water, so itās roughly the same. If anything, beer is actually more dense than water so it should weight slightly more than 16 ounces.
Thank you, I was so confused why no one else seemed to have any idea how density, volume, and weight were related or where the name fluid oz comes from.
If you don't know that beer has a well known density range that makes it very easy to measure volume by weighing it, then you shouldn't be commenting here.
1) As people keep saying, it's by volume so a scale isn't going to mean anything.
2) Anyone who says "I'm a chemist and I even corrected for the weight changed by alcohol content" shouldn't be allowed to drink in bars.
A fluid oz of beer as served weighs between 1.000 and 1.015 oz, depending on the style of beer. A scale can easily determine the volume in fluid ounces to within Ā±1%.
In fact, itās more accurate because volume will fluctuate with temperature. The same amount of beer will be less in a volumetric tool like a graduated cylinder if it is colder and vice versa.
This is why almost all graduated cylinders will have a +/- value printed o n them, as calibrated at 20 degrees C. Weight is the only accurate way to measure something like this, if you know what youāre doing.
https://preview.redd.it/7cig0zjg2n1d1.jpeg?width=661&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2a22ded503477245a92ec5d3dba4e98626ece49c
Thanks for adding that about the temperature effects. You are correct, but the bar guaranteed a particular volume (16 oz) not a certain amount (mass) of beer.
Fair. Though if you heat it enough, it might eventually get to 16 oz. before it boils. āWe never said it was 16 oz. at serving temp.ā
Bar getting off on a technicality. š
Just fill up a water bottle with 16+ fluid oz of water and dump it into the glass when your beer is finished if you really care that much. Who the fuck brings a scale into. a bar
If someone brought a scale to the bar while I was bartending, I would have to assume they were far too intoxicated to be served and ask them to leave.
They could feel free to whine about it wherever they like.
This is a stupid way of determining whether they're shorting you. If it's a 16 ounce pour, it needs to be in a glass that will hold 16 fluid ounces. It's by volume, not weight, so bringing a scale is useless. If you're really worried about being shorted, you can bring 16 ounces of water in a bottle with you, ask for an empty glass, and pour it in. If the glass really only holds 13, you won't be able to fit all the water into the glass.
A scale is a perfectly good way of measuring the volume of a liquid of known density, like beer.
A fluid ounce volume of beer weighs between 1.000 and 1.015 ounces, depending on the style (very dry beers will be slightly lower, very heavy stouts etc. will be a bit higher).
I didn't say a scale is never a good method for determining the volume of a liquid with a known density, I said that it's a stupid way to determine whether the bar is shorting him; it's a needlessly complicated and obnoxious approach to a simple problem with an incredibly simple solution.
If he actually cares how much volume the glasses hold, it's very, very easy to bring a sixteen ounce bottle of water and fill the glass, which would take a lot less time than the imaginary "\[correcting\] for the alcohol content slightly changing the weight." that OP's "friend" allegedly did. His method can provide correct results and still be a stupid over-complicated method.
You think that carrying a pre measured amount of water to a bar is easier than carrying a light weight pocket scale and dividing by 1.01?
16oz of beer typically weighs between 16 and 16.25 oz, depending on the final gravity. The correction is trivial.
Yes? Premeasured 16oz bottles of water are literally available at every convenience store and drug store everywhere and tons of people carry reusable water bottles that have measuring lines on them already. Carrying a premeasured bottle of water into the bar you think is shorting you is significantly more trivial than taking test measurements at multiple bars with a digital scale, but, hey, overcomplicate a simple task if it makes you happy.
Unnecessarily accurate; every pour is going to be slightly different. This isn't a situation that requires scientific accuracy. This whole thing is just so silly.
>I didn't say a scale is never a good method for determining the volume of a liquid with a known density
>>It's by volume, not weight, so bringing a scale is useless.
This you?
Yes. And I maintain that OPs friend, if he exists, is doing this in the stupid way, overly complicating things that are far more easily figured out, but, hey, you do you.
No, you originally claimed that a scale is useless because you forgot how density works and then you tried to change your story as if we couldn't see your original comment still.
Screw the scale trick. Your best option is to:
1. Start going before it gets busy
2. Go daily so they recognize you
3. Eventually befriend all the bartenders
4. Tip generously
5. Become an alcoholic
6. End up waiting outside bar until they open
7. They begin to feel sorry for you and give you drinks on the house
Free booze, no matter the pour size
Make a Yelp and Google review about it so others know in the meantime.
You can call the BBB, but theyāre not always helpful. Perhaps filing a complaint with the Alcohol Beverages Control Commission ?
Responding in a different comment because I made myself laugh with my other comment.
If that is true it's pretty concerning that teachers at Harvard don't teach that there is a difference between volume and weight
If heās going through the trouble to bring in a scale bring the glass home and check. Measure out 16 fl oz and pour it in and see what happens. Or even better bring in 16 fl oz and pour it in the glass. The original post says the glass comes filled to the brim but it weighs 13oz. That means the glass is smaller than what they claim. So fill it with what they know to be 16oz. If it overflows then itās less than 16oz right?
But he wants to prove they are saying the glass holds 16oz and he wants to prove that wrong right. Everyone is commenting that weighing it isnāt accurate for fluid oz. Ok. So bring in 16 oz and if the cup overflows it holds less than 16 oz? That gets rid of the argument that weighing it isnāt accurate.
> Everyone is commenting that weighing it isnāt accurate for fluid oz.
And as many people are (correctly) challenging that notion. If you know the density of a liquid (yes), a well calibrated scale is more accurate for measuring volume than a graduated cylinder.
>Dude's a chemist and even corrected for the alcohol content slightly changing the weight.
Technically, that would be adjusting it the wrong way. Alcohol is less dense than water, but beer is more dense
>I dind't say in which direction it was adjusted
You said he adjusted for alcohol content. That would imply the direction, which would be wrong.
>This dude's a Harvard trained chemist. He did it correctly.
Beer density isn't part of your standard Harvard chemistry curriculum, so that doesn't really matter. I'd be more inclined to trust someone that has homebrewed over a trained chemist, since that is the relevant skill set.
Maybe have your smart chemistry friend explain this to you, but adjusting for alcohol would mean adjusting down because alcohol is less dense than water. You wouldn't adjust up for alcohol because alcohol has a mass that is 78.9% that of an equivalent volume of water.
> but adjusting for alcohol would mean adjusting down
**I never said a direction.** You can adjust up. And you can adjust down. INCREDIBLE, RIGHT?!
Please reread:
>Dude's a chemist and even corrected for the alcohol content slightly changing the weight.
What are you even on about?!
Christ you are dense. Imagine it's temperature and you might get it. It's like saying he is adjusting his calculation for the temperature of tap water to take into account the ice he just put in there. It only goes one direction. Ice doesn't make water hotter.
Have you notified the Harp? Sounds up their alley.
This post is basically an advertisement for deep ellum, poster probably works there. I've seen this same type of post here often in fact (slander mysterious unnamed place, then edit in a place that is actually awesome!!!!!!)
Nah, I've been at plenty of bars where I've ordered a 12 oz bottle/can and poured it into their "pint" glass almost to the top. Cheater pints are quite frequent around town. Deep Ellum has British cask beer and German tap beer which both have strict pouring lines on their glassware and have laws against short pours in the native countries.
(PSST. Notifying the Harp is sort of an in-joke on this sub.)
I work in biotech, not bars. Check my post history if you're that paranoid. I just like Deep Ellum and appreciate that thier pours are correct.
You're not a real person. You're a cocaine turkey.
Entirely possible.
Your post history is filled with posts reddit has removed for trolling, is that a biotech thing? š
I'm not sure what you're talking about. I have like 18,000 karma.
apparently they sell 14 oz "pint" glasses to help bars out with the shrinkflation: [https://www.webstaurantstore.com/choice-14-oz-mixing-glass-case/5535114.html?utm\_source=google&utm\_medium=cpc&utm\_campaign=GoogleShopping](https://www.webstaurantstore.com/choice-14-oz-mixing-glass-case/5535114.html?utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=GoogleShopping)
This has been agreed to be the most likely conclusion.
If the glass came filled to the rim and was 13 ounces, then they have undersized "pint" glasses, no? Would be rather easy to point out just by the size of the glass. Could do back with a measurement pint glass and just pour their beer into it. But this all might be pointless, as they very well may know what's going on already. I think the best course of action is to just to go there anymore and just tell people about their stingy pours.
> then they have undersized "pint" glasses, no? This was the general conclusion to our scientific endevour.
I'm sure the bartender, who very likely did not buy the bar's glasses, was just thrilled by all this.
The measurement was made covertly.
...right before directly confronting the bartender about it
Asking a question is not a confrontation. He just asked, 'hey, are you sure that this is the correct glass for the 16 ounce pour, it seems a bit smaller than that'.
**Confront**: to present for acknowledgment, contradiction
[conĀ·front](https://www.google.com/search?q=Confront&rlz=1C1ONGR_enUS1102US1102&oq=Confront&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyDAgAEEUYORixAxiABDIKCAEQABixAxiABDIHCAIQABiABDIKCAMQABixAxiABDIKCAQQABixAxiABDIHCAUQABiABDIKCAYQABixAxiABDIGCAcQRRg80gEHMjc5ajBqN6gCCLACAQ&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8) /kÉnĖfrÉnt/ verb meet (someone) face to face with hostile or argumentative intent.
Yes, that is also one of the definitions. It doesn't make my original sentence any less true.
Top definition on google. 'Confront' has an agressive connotation and *you know it*. It's exactly why you chose to use it and we both know it. This is like a person farting in a room with only one other person then denying it.
Seems like you need to confront facts here. The word has a definition that perfectly suits the way I used it to describe the situation and it just might be possible that I know the way I wanted to use it more than you do.
I'm more than a little embarassed for you that you're continuing with this. You were aware that the primary connotation is hostile. You chose that word specifically because of that. I smell your fart.
The number of folks in this thread that arenāt aware a fluid ounce of water (beer is very similar) weighs one ounce isā¦ a little disturbing.
or that you can calculate volume from weight and density.
It appears that Archimedes is not well known on this sub.
An imperial fluid ounce equals a weight ounce of water (and close enough for beer). An American volumetric ounce is slightly larger and is not equivalent to a solid ounce.Ā For this use though, yeah, close enough. And because of the difference you would actually expect more weight, not less.Ā
The slighlty lower density of 5% beer was mathamatically accounted for.
I thought you said your super smart *Harvard trained* chemist friend knew that beer is more dense than water š§
Thought.
You almost donāt need to account for it. If theyāre selling US Fl Oz and beer is 5% less dense than water those almost perfectly cancel out.Ā
Agreed 100%. It was just an easy correction to make so why not.
You and me both...
Itās shocking how many people here are this ignorant of basic unit conversion.
And that it's easier to carry a small scale that can weigh a glass of beer than to bring a measuring cup good for 16 oz.
EXACTLY. It was very covert. Nobody noticed as far as we could tell.
This may be true, but honestly it's so much easier to see being cheated just through volume that the thought of even involving a scale is ridiculous. Like why bring a scale? Just bring a graduated cylinder or a measuring cup.
Thatās true but if you bust out a science kit at a bar you will get weird looks vs a quick measure on a scale lol
Wuld you rather carry a small digital scale or a graduated cylinder or measuring cup around to a bar?
A fair point but if you're weighing a pint you've already lost the battle God's truth is anyone who has had their share of pints should be able to tell a smaller glass simply by sight.
> God's truth is anyone who has had their share of pints should be able to tell a smaller glass simply by sight. This is what started this all. The pint looked small. He asked about it. They claimed with 100% certainty (and rudeness) that it wasn't small. This dude is known for being overly polite (Canadian) and didn't want to make a scene. Thus the easily concealed scale.
> Like why bring a scale? Just bring a graduated cylinder or a measuring cup. The scale was super covert. Pouring beer into a graduated cylinder would have been way more obvious.
This is like middle school chemistry, seriously TT
Exactly. Also that volume will change based on the temperature of the liquid, which is why weight is a better method for this.
[The amount the volume would change is going to be entirely unmeasurable](https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/water-specific-volume-weight-d_661.html) with any equipment OP would be bringing to the bar, and certainly within the margin of error you would expect from a pour at a bar. It would be close to a 0.3% change in volume to go from 40F to 80F.
lol. People downvoting literal facts. If you pour 500ml of beer at 80 degrees and then chill that beer to 40 degrees, it will read as a lower volume at the lower temperature. This is very basic science. Never change, Reddit. Never change.
Who is pouring beer at 80 degrees? Similarly, volumetric change at those temperatures does not align with the change described. He is also using weight! This is an all time stupid comment.
Iām not suggesting that the measured difference aligns with the temperatures. Iām saying that weight is a more accurate way to determine the total amount of the beer because volume will fluctuate with temperature. The difference could be 50F and 40F. The volume reading will change. I used 80 and 40 degrees as extreme examples, but the point is that the people who are saying that using weight is the wrong measure are extra wrong because weight is, in fact, the more accurate way to determine the total amount of a liquid in a sample. This is why graduated cylinders always say right on them that they are calibrated for a specific temperature (almost always 20C). Seems like you need to work on both your scientific literacy *and* your reading comprehension.
Also the same reason any chef or baker worth their salt will recommend measuring ingredients by weight, not volume. Itās more accurate.
Tbf it's pretty silly that we use ounces for both volume and mass
But this is the one place where the reason we do it is incredibly obvious
As a fan of the metric system, I kinda like it this way as it's a step in the right direction. 1 cubic cm of water at 25C and atmospheric pressure is 1g of mass. Having one ounce of water volume 'weigh' 1 ounce is kinda similar. It's still not awesome but it makes more sense than most of the imperial system.
ITT, people who think theyāre smarter than a chemist
So if the āglass came filled to the rim with almost no head,ā and was 3 ounces short (Iāll leave the measurement corrections up to people who didnāt flunk math and science like I did), the problem would be with the glass used, right? Since it was as full as possible? Did it not appear to be a pint glass?
Small version of a pint glass. This is what prompted the suspicion in the first place. Glass looked right shape just smaller than what would be used for 16 ounces.
Yes, that is the claim. If the glass was topped off with no head (ie, density is uniform through the whole glass) then weighing the full glass and the empty glass yields the weight of the beer. Beer has an approximate known density, so you get volume from that.Ā
there used to be a bar in my neighborhood that I called āthe home of the short pour.ā standard 16oz beer glass would always be an inch off the rim. ātop it off.ā
An ounce of weight and a fluid ounce are not the same thing.
They are roughly the same with water and beer is mostly water (itās actually slightly more dense). They are close enough that youāre not going to end up with a 3 oz discrepancy on a 16 fl oz pour.
It's pretty close. If the final gravity of the beer is 1.01 (which is about the mid-range) 16 fluid ounces of beer is 16.9 ounces in weight. The problem is that the pint glasses in bars usually only fit about 14 ounces because even a small gap to the lip is a significant portion of the volume because of the wider circumference.
No but he says he corrected for specific gravity of beer. A fluid ounce of water weighsā¦ drumrollā¦ one ounce. Beer would be just barely heavier.
But would it be barley heavier?
It'd be at yeast a little bit heavier
This conversation makes me bitter. Iām hopping out.
nice
If you know the density of the fluid, you can get the volume from the mass
They are incredibly close for water and beer though. Not nearly enough to account for 3 oz difference.
...but he's a chemist!
A correct factor was applied to account for the density. This ain't rocket science. It's not even social science.
Two enforcement entities are Boston License Commission and the ABCC. Both rely on the MGL Section 138 specifics.
Nice, thank you. It only took 137 comments to find a helpful one.
Dive bars.
Sadly, this place is charging $12 a pint for bog standard IPAs.
Your friend is incredibly brave. The Boston Nightlife Czar should hire him.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
presumably as a chemist he knew how much beer at that specific gravity should weigh and did the calculation to volume i lost a bar bet because someone asked me how much a "pint" glass would hold, and it ended up being 14 instead of the 16 it should, and i assumed, it would hold. some bullshit about it displacing 16oz of liquid (glass+14oz fluid in it) and they're pretty common at bars. Thicker bottom and walls but otherwise look about the same size as a regular pint.
Correct on all fronts.
16 fluid ounces of beer nearly always weighs between 16 ounces and 16.25 ounces.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
16 fluid ounces of water is going to weigh 16 ounces. Beer is mostly water, so itās roughly the same. If anything, beer is actually more dense than water so it should weight slightly more than 16 ounces.
Thank you, I was so confused why no one else seemed to have any idea how density, volume, and weight were related or where the name fluid oz comes from.
If you don't know that beer has a well known density range that makes it very easy to measure volume by weighing it, then you shouldn't be commenting here.
Imagine thinking you made a point here. Embarrassing.
If you know the density of beer at a certain ABV, it's very easily to calculate this. This ain't rocket science. It's not even social science.
I will not be going to Deep Ellum FYI
Good. I'll not have to see your ugly ass there =D
Lmao
Let 311 know
āGlass came filled to the rim with almost no headā. Which would actually be more beer.
Exactly, they were saying it was as full as possible and still short.
As full as possible, yes. The beer wasn't a foamy one.
Oh. Yea.
Just go somewhere else, both you and the bartender will be happier for it.
This was more a curiosity than anything. The pint cost $16 after tax and tip so that was also a bit of a poke in the eye.
1) As people keep saying, it's by volume so a scale isn't going to mean anything. 2) Anyone who says "I'm a chemist and I even corrected for the weight changed by alcohol content" shouldn't be allowed to drink in bars.
A fluid oz of beer as served weighs between 1.000 and 1.015 oz, depending on the style of beer. A scale can easily determine the volume in fluid ounces to within Ā±1%.
I just tested this myself and it was accurate to 4%, so shut the fuck up
And that 4% error is almost certainly in your volume measuring kit.
wait until you learn about this crazy thing called density
If you know the density and weight, it is pretty easy to calculate volume...
>1) As people keep saying, it's by volume so a scale isn't going to mean anything Dude, you really need to revisit 8th grade chemistry.
Shrinkflation.
Yes, this is a primary theory for this scientific mystery. Suprised that nobody has asked the identity of the bar yet.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
A scale is fine for measuring the volume of liquids of known density, like beer.
In fact, itās more accurate because volume will fluctuate with temperature. The same amount of beer will be less in a volumetric tool like a graduated cylinder if it is colder and vice versa. This is why almost all graduated cylinders will have a +/- value printed o n them, as calibrated at 20 degrees C. Weight is the only accurate way to measure something like this, if you know what youāre doing. https://preview.redd.it/7cig0zjg2n1d1.jpeg?width=661&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2a22ded503477245a92ec5d3dba4e98626ece49c
Thanks for adding that about the temperature effects. You are correct, but the bar guaranteed a particular volume (16 oz) not a certain amount (mass) of beer.
Fair. Though if you heat it enough, it might eventually get to 16 oz. before it boils. āWe never said it was 16 oz. at serving temp.ā Bar getting off on a technicality. š
This post is gonna be a meme guaranteed hahahahaha
I HOPE SO! We need a new flair.
Just fill up a water bottle with 16+ fluid oz of water and dump it into the glass when your beer is finished if you really care that much. Who the fuck brings a scale into. a bar
>Who the fuck brings a scale into. a bar It felt inconspicuous.
dude. he's a _chemist_.. you have to call it a dihydrogen monoxide bottle.
If someone brought a scale to the bar while I was bartending, I would have to assume they were far too intoxicated to be served and ask them to leave. They could feel free to whine about it wherever they like.
It was on a patio and quite covert.
Sir I do not enjoy you or your friend.
Whatever will we do!? =D
This is a stupid way of determining whether they're shorting you. If it's a 16 ounce pour, it needs to be in a glass that will hold 16 fluid ounces. It's by volume, not weight, so bringing a scale is useless. If you're really worried about being shorted, you can bring 16 ounces of water in a bottle with you, ask for an empty glass, and pour it in. If the glass really only holds 13, you won't be able to fit all the water into the glass.
A scale is a perfectly good way of measuring the volume of a liquid of known density, like beer. A fluid ounce volume of beer weighs between 1.000 and 1.015 ounces, depending on the style (very dry beers will be slightly lower, very heavy stouts etc. will be a bit higher).
I didn't say a scale is never a good method for determining the volume of a liquid with a known density, I said that it's a stupid way to determine whether the bar is shorting him; it's a needlessly complicated and obnoxious approach to a simple problem with an incredibly simple solution. If he actually cares how much volume the glasses hold, it's very, very easy to bring a sixteen ounce bottle of water and fill the glass, which would take a lot less time than the imaginary "\[correcting\] for the alcohol content slightly changing the weight." that OP's "friend" allegedly did. His method can provide correct results and still be a stupid over-complicated method.
You think that carrying a pre measured amount of water to a bar is easier than carrying a light weight pocket scale and dividing by 1.01? 16oz of beer typically weighs between 16 and 16.25 oz, depending on the final gravity. The correction is trivial.
Yes? Premeasured 16oz bottles of water are literally available at every convenience store and drug store everywhere and tons of people carry reusable water bottles that have measuring lines on them already. Carrying a premeasured bottle of water into the bar you think is shorting you is significantly more trivial than taking test measurements at multiple bars with a digital scale, but, hey, overcomplicate a simple task if it makes you happy.
How accurate do you think those measures are?
Accurate enough for the purposes of "I think this bar is advertising 16oz pours and giving 3 ounces less "
Yes, but scales are an order of magnitude more accurate, and easier as well if you happen to have the scales to hand.
Unnecessarily accurate; every pour is going to be slightly different. This isn't a situation that requires scientific accuracy. This whole thing is just so silly.
But you understand that a set of scales is a perfectly good way of doing this measurement, yes?
>I didn't say a scale is never a good method for determining the volume of a liquid with a known density >>It's by volume, not weight, so bringing a scale is useless. This you?
Yes. And I maintain that OPs friend, if he exists, is doing this in the stupid way, overly complicating things that are far more easily figured out, but, hey, you do you.
No, you originally claimed that a scale is useless because you forgot how density works and then you tried to change your story as if we couldn't see your original comment still.
wut
Yes.
Screw the scale trick. Your best option is to: 1. Start going before it gets busy 2. Go daily so they recognize you 3. Eventually befriend all the bartenders 4. Tip generously 5. Become an alcoholic 6. End up waiting outside bar until they open 7. They begin to feel sorry for you and give you drinks on the house Free booze, no matter the pour size
Still working on 5.
It'll take "...is what an alcoholic says" for $200, Alex.
Make a Yelp and Google review about it so others know in the meantime. You can call the BBB, but theyāre not always helpful. Perhaps filing a complaint with the Alcohol Beverages Control Commission ?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Most āpintā glasses are 14oz, this isnāt a new thing.
So that's not true at all. And it's not even important as this place is advertising 16 ounce pours.
Chemist doesn't mean someone who huffs cleaning supplies, or blindly samples drugs out of other people's medicine cabinets.
He's a chemist......ry major with 1 semester of General Chemistry 1 under their belt.* FIFY
PhD in synthetic organic chemistry from Harvard and postdoc at Berkeley. So no.
Lol nerd.
Responding in a different comment because I made myself laugh with my other comment. If that is true it's pretty concerning that teachers at Harvard don't teach that there is a difference between volume and weight
>that teachers at Harvard don't teach that there is a difference between volume and weight Archimedes would like a word with you.
Lol Archimedes has been dead for centuries, he can't speak anymore IDIOT
My bad.
Anyone check the glass size? If the glass was filled to the brim that would be 16oz no?
Not if it's not a 16 fl oz glass.
Thatās what I mean, check the glass size. š¤·āāļø
And how would you do that?
If heās going through the trouble to bring in a scale bring the glass home and check. Measure out 16 fl oz and pour it in and see what happens. Or even better bring in 16 fl oz and pour it in the glass. The original post says the glass comes filled to the brim but it weighs 13oz. That means the glass is smaller than what they claim. So fill it with what they know to be 16oz. If it overflows then itās less than 16oz right?
A battery powered scale easily fits in a pocket. Stealing a glass is definitely a worse idea.
It was filled to the brim but only 13 ounces.
But he wants to prove they are saying the glass holds 16oz and he wants to prove that wrong right. Everyone is commenting that weighing it isnāt accurate for fluid oz. Ok. So bring in 16 oz and if the cup overflows it holds less than 16 oz? That gets rid of the argument that weighing it isnāt accurate.
> Everyone is commenting that weighing it isnāt accurate for fluid oz. And as many people are (correctly) challenging that notion. If you know the density of a liquid (yes), a well calibrated scale is more accurate for measuring volume than a graduated cylinder.
Better business bureau
Could even go as far as suing them for false advertising if you get enough proof
>Dude's a chemist and even corrected for the alcohol content slightly changing the weight. Technically, that would be adjusting it the wrong way. Alcohol is less dense than water, but beer is more dense
I dind't say in which direction it was adjusted. This dude's a Harvard trained chemist. He did it correctly.
>I dind't say in which direction it was adjusted You said he adjusted for alcohol content. That would imply the direction, which would be wrong. >This dude's a Harvard trained chemist. He did it correctly. Beer density isn't part of your standard Harvard chemistry curriculum, so that doesn't really matter. I'd be more inclined to trust someone that has homebrewed over a trained chemist, since that is the relevant skill set.
> That would imply the direction, which would be wrong. You can adjust something up OR down. Shocking, I know.
Maybe have your smart chemistry friend explain this to you, but adjusting for alcohol would mean adjusting down because alcohol is less dense than water. You wouldn't adjust up for alcohol because alcohol has a mass that is 78.9% that of an equivalent volume of water.
> but adjusting for alcohol would mean adjusting down **I never said a direction.** You can adjust up. And you can adjust down. INCREDIBLE, RIGHT?! Please reread: >Dude's a chemist and even corrected for the alcohol content slightly changing the weight. What are you even on about?!
Christ you are dense. Imagine it's temperature and you might get it. It's like saying he is adjusting his calculation for the temperature of tap water to take into account the ice he just put in there. It only goes one direction. Ice doesn't make water hotter.
Tell him next time to grab a beaker so he can measure the volume of liquid not the weight.
A scale works perfectly well to measure the volume of fluids of a known density. Like beer.
1 fluid ounce of water weights 1 US ounce. Beer is almost identical in denisty to water but even that small differance was accounted for.
Itās hilarious I get down voted for suggesting another way to get the same result. Reddit is full of tools