Is it possible to stir-fry meat cutlets without "oil bombing" ?) While frying in the pan, meat gives out the moisture, that causes oil to "shoot".  How do you make cutlets? And is there something, that I can add to the meat, to make water stay inside or go out slower? I've tried to add dry bread to meat, but it doesn't help. Maybe egg?
Cooking steak in frying pan, problem with oil splatter I was using canola oil and put the stove top setting on "high - 9". I read plenty of guides suggesting there will infact be oil splatter, but it was pretty excessive and burning my arm with one drop getting near my eye before I stopped. I turned the heat setting down to "medium - 4", where the oil splatter seemed to drop substantially. Before I try to make steak again I'd like to get some clarification  So my questions are:   Which heat setting am I supposed to use? Is that type of oil splatter normal or should I try using a different oil, and if so, what oil? Should oiling the meat instead of the pan help the problem?
What are Extension Tubes? What are Extension Tubes? How to force the user to download a file, not to view it? What are some examples of awkward sounding but grammatically correct sentences? What are some examples of awkward sounding but grammatically correct sentences? Ubuntu kernel not upgrading with upgrade to 15.10 Confusion between Voltage gain & Voltage gain in decibels (dB) The definition of voltage gain is \$V_{\text{out}}/V_{\text{in}}\$.  However, I read some articles about the gain in decibels, and I have a confusion now.  Here is an article about it:   Here, I understand the definition of Power gain in decibels, which is $$ \text{Gain} = 10 \log \left( {P_{\text{out}} \over P_{\text{in}}} \right)\text{ dB} $$  However, I can't understand why Voltage gain in decibels is $$ 20 \log \left( {V_{\text{out}} \over V_{\text{in}}} \right)\text{ dB} $$  If \$ 20 \log \left( {V_{\text{out}} \over V_{\text{in}}} \right)\text{ dB} \$ is derived from $$ 10 \log {\left( {V_{\text{out}}^2 \over R_{\text{out}}}\right) \over \left({V_{\text{in}}^2 \over R_{\text{in}}}\right) }\text{ dB} $$ then this is the power gain, not the voltage gain, isn't it? However, the Wikipedia says it is a formula for the Voltage gain in decibels. I thought the voltage gain in decibels would be \$ 10 \log \left( {V_{\text{out}} \over V_{\text{in}}} \right)\text{ dB} \$. Actually, the example section in that linked page uses voltage gain \$ V_{\text{out}} \over V_{\text{in}} \$.  Why did \$V^2/R\$ suddenly come out from the voltage gain in decibels? Let $\Omega=\mathbb{N}$. For each $E\subset\Omega$ let $N_n(E)$ be the cardinality of the set $E\cap \{1,2,\ldots,n\}$. Define $C=\left\{E: \lim_{n\rightarrow \infty} \frac{N_n(E)}{n} \text{ exists}\right\}$. Show that $C$ isn't a field.  I already know that it isn't closed to finite union of non-disjoint set but I can't see why. I saw a post that somebody said &quot;the set of natural numbers whose first digit is 1 doesn't have this limit&quot;. I'm in trouble to see why this limit wouldn't exists in finite unions. Thanks in advance. How do I parse an ISO 8601-formatted date? Capture characters from standard input without waiting for enter to be pressed Why is "If ψ ∈ Γ then the sequent (Γ ⊢ ψ) is correct" true? In Chiswell and Hodges Mathematical Logic the authors define a sequent as such      "A sequent is an expression   (Γ ⊢ ψ) (or Γ ⊢ ψ when there is no ambiguity)   where ψ is a statement (the conclusion of the sequent) and Γ is a set of statements (the assumptions of the sequent) ...There is a proof whose conclusion is ψ and whose undischarged assumptions are all in the set Γ.".   They then go on to provide the axiom as follows:     Sequent Rule (Axiom Rule) If ψ ∈ Γ then the sequent (Γ ⊢ ψ) is correct.   Upon further reading about what exactly it means to be a sequent  I understand that for $\psi$ to be satisfied or "correct", every element of   $\Gamma$ must be true as their all linked by AND conjunctions.    What confuses me is that suppose that there is an element in $\Gamma$ which is false then the whole antecedent is false according to the wikipedia definition by conjunction and then even though $\psi$ exists and is true in $\Gamma$ ultimately $\psi$ would be false. Could someone please explain to me and help clarify how the axiom and the definition can both be true. Thank you for all of your help. Accessing UI thread handler from a service Why did the first Linux developers choose to implement a non-preemptive kernel? Is it to save synchronization?  As far as I know, Linux was developed in the early '90s, when PCs had a single processor. What advantage does a non-preemptive kernel give in such PCs? Why, however, the advantage is reduced by multi-core processors? I know that children’s books is correct, but for some reason I want to say kids books, even though I know that it’s a plural possessive noun ending in an s.   A quick search on the web turns up Barnes &amp; Noble, who have a web page title that reads “Children's Books, Kids Books”.   Is the major bookseller wrong here? Or is there some exception I don’t remember?  More simply, is it kids books or kids’ books — and why? What is the difference between the Circle-K and Lawson Power Cube? How can I fix Print Composer errors due to huge file size? Does the Black Panther suit give extra speed? So in Civil War, the Black Panther suit seems to give the suit holder some extra speed, because the guy was running as fast as Bucky and Captain America.  So does it give extra speed? If so, how does that work? Performance difference between dot notation versus method call in Objective-C You can use a standard dot notation or a method call in Objective-C to access a property of an object in Objective-C.  myObject.property = YES;   or  [myObject setProperty:YES];   Is there a difference in performance (in terms of accessing the property)? Is it just a matter of preference in terms of coding style? The Pearson correlation coefficient of x and y is the same, whether you compute pearson(x, y) or pearson(y, x). This suggests that doing a linear regression of y given x or x given y should be the same, but I don't think that's the case.   Can someone shed light on when the relationship is not symmetric, and how that relates to the Pearson correlation coefficient (which I always think of as summarizing the best fit line)? CUDA Driver API vs. CUDA runtime Is there a saying or idiom for "trying to get the truth from someone by lying"? context   Mary-Ann got home late from school.  Asked where she had been, she said she had spent the afternoon at the library.  Her father thinks she is lying and says: "I know you haven’t been there because I was there myself".  He is lying because he thinks she will tell the truth if she realizes she has been caught. boyfriend – “your sister told me everything” (sister did nothing) -  girlfriend – “Oh, did she? I’m gonna kill her.    The rationale for doing this is to catch someone by surprise so he will admit having lied.  Soemtimes, however, the person isn’t lying and the real liar will have to reap the consequences of his reproachable action, having to admit he was just/it was just ...........(saying or idiom)..... Scatterplot with too many points