What is the most scientifically optimized way to make coffee?
For instance, cold vs hot brewing or espresso based on the solubility profiles of compounds in coffee beans at various temperatures and pressures and their flavor profiles/aromas, different aspects of cultivation such as strain, soil quality, climate, etc, the chemical changes in different grades of roasting and in whether or not they've been swallowed and shit out by that one mammal, and whether you should add your milk sooner or later to keep it hotter.
>>7674201
cold brew
>>7674203
Not OP, but nice citations you got there buddy. . . .
I myself heard that hitting some coffee beans with a refracted ionized lazer beam in a .4g vacuum was the best way to extract the flavor.
No citations being needed in this thread of course, so my claim has as much merit as yours.
>>7674215
>ionized lazer
What? How do you ionize light?
we have a sqt here you know. And if your question doesnt get answered there then you can be sure it was quite a half baked/retarded question and the answer is probably obvious
In this case the answer is that there is no "optimal" method to extracting the "optimal" flavor profile because the taste of coffee is purely subjective. Some people like starbucks i think it tastes burnt there's no science there just opinion.
If you wanna be a bitch about it the optimal way to make regular coffee is 195-205F water presoak and then 195-205F strain.
>>7674217
It's a joke anon
I said the most retarded sounding scientific thing that came to mind on the spot to show everyone the importance of citations.
Without any my claim has just as much merit as his.
I've actually heard that the best coffee extraction method is to bake them with x-rays for an hour followed up by submersing them in the marina trench for 3 months so the pressure compresses the flavor, followed by letting them dry naturally near the equator, between 0-12 degrees. Gota be in that range so they get the right amount of UV light.
The more you know eh.
>>7674201
>whether you should add your milk sooner or later to keep it hotter
Top kek m8 8/10
>>7674201
cold osmosis diffracted methylxanthine adhesion
>>7674235
dude's absolutely right. You on the other hand ar fucktard. You need to learn about Newton's rate of cooling.
All I know is expresso based coffee tastes like shit.
Drip master race
>>7674201
When you have a system with so many variables, some of them unknown, and not all of them controllable, and when you do not know how the output of the system responds to each of the variables, the best you can hope for is to build an empirical model. Not to mention the measurement of the output (quality of the coffee) is subjective and qualitative, and it is difficult to create a metric by which it can be quantified.
>>7674201
>whether you should add your milk sooner or later to keep it hotter.
Modernist Cuisine has a good section on this. In short: yes, you should.
>>7675470
To clarify: you should add it sooner. Didn't read the post thoroughly enough.
The most optimal way to make coffee is to extract all the caffeine from the beans and snort it. You get the effects of coffee faster.
>>7674315
You're doing it wrong.
>>7674315
gonna have to +1 this
>>7676024
>noopept
oh dear
>>7674215
>tips fedora
>>7674226
I answered his question if you want citations, ask. No need to be a /sci/ whiteknight.
French press with distilled water is a copper pan at a little less than boiling.
