So I just cracked open pic related, but someting is wrong. The

Google calories in 1 serving/30mL of your drink

Perform calorie analysis with burning

The cost to perform this will far exceed the cost of getting another bottle

>>8592504

It's ~70kcal

>calorie analysis with burning
The what now?

>>8592504
it's not so hard, though. OP needs a vacuum flask, a thermometer, and find a way to burn a sample inside.
then you compare change of temperatures from burning of control and test samples

you can also search for "quantitative analysis of alcohols" but then again, cost of performing one exceeds the cost of bottle

>>8592524
>cost exceeds
It doesn't matter, It's for science

I was really hoping I could use something like a sugarmeter and do some math, damn.

>>8592528
>http://www.jbc.org/content/143/3/633.full.pdf
took me less than a minute

>>8592483
Off the top of my head

>determine the weight of the liquid
>determine the volume
>work out the density
>burn the alcohol off
>work out the new weight, volume and density
>determine the difference

Is it really this convoluted?
No easier way?

File: American-psycho-bateman-1-.jpg (216KB, 590x322px) Image search: [Google]

216KB, 590x322px

>>8592483
It's actually easy if you have a distillation apparatus. Boil a sample off at > 100 C to remove everything with a high boiling point, like flavor compounds.

Then cool it down to 85 C. The water will condense, the alcohol will remain a vapor.

Suck off (or let your mom suck off - she's good at it) the vapor, cool the water down to room temperature, and weigh.

>>8592504
>he thinks you can just DO bomb calorimetry and get accurate results

>>8592555
>>8592567
All you need is a measuring jug, scales, saucepan and matches

Gonna try this out with some whiskey. Will report back.

>>8592555
You can stop after the third step, because you can calculate the expected density of a mixture of 60% water and 40% ethanol, from which a bottle of whiskey won't deviate too much. No need to burn anything (which won't even work when the alcohol content is too low).

>>8592579

Ok so I used Brandy instead.


>>8592594
>water
not sure if that's a fair assumption desu

>which won't even work when the alcohol content is too low

You can't bullshit me when I've literally just burned it


I got 35%. Bottle says 36%. I'd call that a success.

File: eddie-006.jpg (66KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 640x480px

>>8592640
step by step pls, I'm not very smart

>>8592683
Well this is all I did

>measure out 100ml of liquid
>put in wok
>heat up
>ignite with matches
>burn
>repeat a couple of times to make sure I got all the alcohol
>measure new volume
>100-new volume = %

Just make sure you switch off the heat before you ignite. I also turned the heat off if it started to simmer to avoid evaporation. Of course you can do it with less liquid but it'll be less accurate. I used measuring spoons to get an accurate volume. Took about 5 minutes.

File: 15822560_1179836202052050_3979634698289589975_n.jpg (77KB, 960x960px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 960x960px

>>8592706
gonna try it, brb

File: 1462888433412.jpg (1MB, 2978x2237px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2978x2237px

>>8592483
>Blended Whiskey
This was your own mistake

Educate yourself, faggot

>>8592713
In case its not obvious, only the alcohol on the surface will burn. You need to use a wide pan and stir gently while its burning.

Let me know how you get on.

File: 1484082748744296397796.jpg (950KB, 1520x2688px) Image search: [Google]

950KB, 1520x2688px

>>8592724
I'm on it, I think I fucked up already, but It is ok cuz I'm wasted.

File: 14840828964511813901403.jpg (889KB, 1520x2688px) Image search: [Google]

889KB, 1520x2688px

The spoon is on fire

>>8592735
That doesn't look like 100ml

File: 1484083102461719004855.jpg (851KB, 2688x1520px) Image search: [Google]

851KB, 2688x1520px

I'm using my protein shaker to measure. It is less than 50.
Won't all this burning evaporate a lot of water?

>>8592745
Maybe the pan was too heated up when I poured it in and it evaporated alot. stfu

>>8592750
>>8592746
I think you spread it out too thinly. Mine was about a cm deep in the wok. Oh well.

File: 14840834044632030154802.jpg (545KB, 1920x1088px) Image search: [Google]

545KB, 1920x1088px

Mid-experiment 2.0 selfie

>>8592759
nigga use a differant pan

It's 50ml now.
3rd test now in a much smaller container

>>8592765
Don't heat up the pan until after you put it in.

And make sure the heat is off while you're burning it.

File: 14840838696081703189476.jpg (891KB, 1520x2688px) Image search: [Google]

891KB, 1520x2688px

>>8592761
What happens if I breathe the vapor? Because I have since I set it on fire.

>>8592768
Did those on 2.0

File: 1484084271326793187027.jpg (1015KB, 1520x2688px) Image search: [Google]

1015KB, 1520x2688px

man, this shit burns 4ever

>>8592785

>burns forever

Alcohol stoves are a thing

File: f1479d7187d62ce74f22a6d66e454586.jpg (109KB, 500x370px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 500x370px

On 3.0 It measured 50+
I did fuck around a bit and very well could have evaporated 10ml of water.


Experiments conclusion
-I'm a faggot
-Bushmills is really 40 as advertised
-Blended whisky really doesn't feel as hard as it is, I guess that is the point of it
Anyway thanks everyone that posted.

I enjoyed this thread

>>8592640
>burning liquor below 100 proof

It's bullshit.

>>8592483
Use a hydrometer

>>8593171
/thread

>>8592483
Quick and dirty "smell" test. Put it in a freezer. 40% alcohol will not freeze. 20% will get slushy and lower may freeze solid.

Work out what the density is supposed to be assuming it's only water and alcohol. Weigh a known volume of liquor. Calculate the density and compare to what it's supposed to be. You could also do more math to figure out the percentage.

Density calculation. If you burn it, you will also evaporate some water and other compounds which boil at a low temperature.

>>8593156
>thread filled with images of alcohol burning
>claims its bullshit

pls

Fucking idiots

>Pour the whisky into a cup and measure the depth to which any buoyant object sinks in the whisky
>repeat with alcohol you know to be at 40abv
>compare depths, as buoyant forces are proportional to density you can work out the alcohol content

This is how alcometers work and has the added benefit of not being a fire hazard and being nondestructive meaning you can drink the rest after the test

>>8594040
>other compounds which boil at a low temperature.
such as?

>>8594167
what if the manufacturer substituted oils instead of alcohol, which have similar density

>>8594193
Oils are way more expensive than ethanol, why would anyone do that