SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 1912.01999

To beer or not to beer: does tapping beer cans prevent beer loss? A randomised controlled trial

Abstract

Objective: Preventing or minimising beer loss when opening a can of beer is socially and economically desirable. One theoretically grounded approach is tapping the can prior to opening, although this has never been rigorously evaluated. We aimed to evaluate the effect of tapping a can of beer on beer loss. Methods: Single centre parallel-group randomised controlled trial. 1031 cans of cans of beer of 330mL were randomised into one of four groups before the experiment: unshaken/untapped (n=256), unshaken/tapped (n=251), shaken/untapped (n=249), or shaken/tapped (n=244). The intervention was tapping the can of beer three times on its side with a single finger. We compared tapping versus non-tapping for cans that had been shaken for 2 minutes or were unshaken. Three teams weighed, tapped or did not tap, opened cans, absorbed any beer loss using paper towels, then re-weighed cans. The teams recorded the mass of each can before and after opening with an accuracy of +/-0.01 grams. Main outcome measure: The main outcome measure was beer loss (in grams). This was calculated as the difference in the mass of the beer after the can was opened compared to before the can was opened. Results: For shaken cans, there was no statistically significant difference in the mass of beer lost when tapping compared to not tapping (mean difference of -0.159g beer lost with tapping, 95% CI -0.36 to 0.04). For unshaken cans, there was also no statistically significant difference between tapping and not tapping. Conclusion: These findings suggest that tapping shaken beer cans does not prevent beer loss when the container is opened. Thus, the practice of tapping a beer prior to opening is unsupported. The only apparent remedy to avoid liquid loss is to wait for bubbles to settle before opening the can.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Elizaveta Sopina, Irina E. Antonescu, Thomas Hansen, Torben Hoejland, Morten M. Jensen, Simon V. Pedersen, Wade Thompson, Philipp Weber, Jamie O Halloran, Melissa G. Beach, Ryan Pulleyblank, Elliot J. Brown. 2019-12-09. To beer or not to beer: does tapping beer cans prevent beer loss? A randomised controlled trial. https://arxiv.org/abs/1912.01999

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

The Epistemic Risk of the 31st Spore: If Planets Aren't Fine Tuned, We're Doing Life Detection Wrong

Exploration of planetary bodies within our solar system will be essential for understanding the origin of life on Earth and the distribution of life in the universe. Planetary protection policy is concerned with balancing this desire for exploration against the risks of contaminating alien planets with Earth life, and contaminating Earth with alien life. However, at present, we have no fundamental scientific understanding of life's emergence or its nature beyond Earth. Given this nearly complete ignorance about the possibility of alien life, or Earth life's capacity to expand beyond our planet, it is difficult to reason about the real risks of space exploration. Here we contend that contemporary understandings of the risks of forward contamination are based on arguments which inconsistently apply our incomplete knowledge to the problem. We reason that a more assertive posture towards space exploration, focused on determining whether other planets in the solar system are inhabited, is warranted and explain why such a posture may not increase the epistemic risks of planetary contamination. Finally, we explore the consequences of our arguments for planetary protection protocols, and life detection efforts.

physics.pop-ph

Project Setu: 3D Multi-Physics Design and Scaled Structural Analysis for a Relativistic Lightsail Architecture

Deep-space exploration beyond the solar system requires eliminating chemical propellant mass penalties to achieve relativistic flight velocities (0.166c at 180 s, reaching the mission target of 0.20c at 227 s). This study presents a 3D multi-physics numerical framework for a 4.0-meter circular lightsail propelled by a 100 GW ground laser array, coupling 3D Maxwell FDTD wave optics, non-linear membrane mechanics, and Stefan-Boltzmann thermal radiation in ANSYS Mechanical APDL and Ansys Lumerical. A four-level grid convergence study establishes numerical independence with an ASME GCI_21 of 0.13%, resolving peak membrane stresses of 530.88 MPa with a 3.77x safety factor against stoichiometric Si3N4 tensile failure. With optical absorption constrained to 10 ppm (A = 1.0 x 10^-5), the steady-state core temperature stabilizes at 923.02 K (0.44% deviation from radiation theory), maintaining a +1,247 K margin below sublimation, while fundamental drumhead modal resonance (7.92 Hz) provides a 7.92x safety buffer against laser jitter. The electrodynamic radiation pressure formulation is cross-verified against published flight telemetry from JAXA IKAROS and NASA LightSail 2 within 0.12% and 2.13%, confirming classical momentum transfer modeling across solar and beamed propulsion regimes.

physics.pop-ph

"It's getting away from us!" - Black Hole Horizons and Relative Speed

Black holes hold considerable fascination for the general public and students alike, and are commonly included in general-science courses on astronomy or modern physics. But teaching about the basics of black holes poses a considerable challenge: Any rigorous description requires concepts and techniques from general relativity, Einstein's theory of geometry and gravitation. And any half-way rigorous introduction to that theory, including the required mathematical tools, is significantly beyond the level of general-science courses. Inevitably, accounts of relativistic physics at the introductory undergraduate level make use of analogies, approximations and simplified models to teach about topics like black holes, gravitational waves, gravitational lensing, or cosmology. The purpose of this article is to given an account of one particular set of analogies for teaching about black holes, all of which are based on modelling the motions of observers in the vicinity of the black hole and rely on the concept of (relative) speed to describe properties of the black hole. While most elements of what I am about to describe can be found in the existing literature, I am not aware of any text that attempts to pull them together into a unified picture at a suitable level of presentation for undergraduate-level teaching; that is the goal of the present text.

physics.pop-ph