Homaru Cantu on ICA

[Vadouvan]

Actually, some of us are doing what you say.

I think new techniques should have a role in the kitchen. As with any pioneering effort, there will be some false starts. But the cowards will never get started, and the weak will die on the way (To paraphrase Heinlein).

Don't presume to speak for me. No one speaks for me but me.

No need for self flattery, I am not speaking for anyone, my use of the word "we" only extends to those who agree with my statements.

[Vadouvan]

Vaudovan, you seem to have more of a moral dilemma with what I do. There is one component missing. Scientific innovation. There is a reason why the wealthiest person in China is the worlds largest solar panel and silicone chip manufacturer. If there is no innovation or nothing added to the problem that balances the equation, then the problem still gets worse.

What I do is NOT for everyone. I understand this. But opinions can take a back seat and join FEMA.

Funny, this hardly rises to the level of a moral dilemna.

Cooking of food and Morality are mutually exclusive for me.

I just find all the theatrics that at the end of the day dont make food any better than it ever was interesting.

Everyone seems to want to equate "progress" with "moving foward".............

I guess the question for me is ...

Does printing sushi on edible paper with edible ink move japanese food foward.

Edited February 7, 2007 by Vadouvan (log)

[inventolux]

Vaudovan, you seem to have more of a moral dilemma with what I do. There is one component missing. Scientific innovation. There is a reason why the wealthiest person in China is the worlds largest solar panel and silicone chip manufacturer. If there is no innovation or nothing added to the problem that balances the equation, then the problem still gets worse.

What I do is NOT for everyone. I understand this. But opinions can take a back seat and join FEMA.

Funny, this hardly rises to the level of a moral dilemna.

Cooking of food and Morality are mutually exclusive for me.

I just find all the theatrics that at the end of the day dont make food any better than it ever was interesting.

Everyone seems to want to equate "progress" with "moving foward".............

I guess the question for me is ...

Does printing sushi on edible paper with edible ink move japanese food foward.

←

Perhaps we should continue down the path of those that "ate" their way out of easter island?? Or maybe those that will produce more and more dead zones because of overfishing? (That would be most of us, we now have 148 and counting.) Finding new sources of organic all natural foods is imparative. Just as the innovators that decided green plants that were extracted out of sea were a source of survival, so will we find more sources of food for the purposes of survival. I like Wylie's way of putting it... "the first caveman to wave meat over a fire was novel at the time." That is true, but we may never have evolved

The key is in the applications of the technique. The technique leads into innovation and innovation leads into applications.

We will not go on forever at this pace, that is an undisputable fact.

However, I can see your point. What you are missing, is the actual product of my work. That will come soon, then be my guest and be the judge.

Omar

Edited February 7, 2007 by inventolux (log)

[Reefpimp]

Vadouvan, you really are the wind beneath my wings. Did you know that?

The point is not necessarily to say, "This is what things are and forever more shall they be ever so." The point is to say, "Here is something new. What can we do with it and where can we go with it?"

Inventolux, have you done any reading into zero-point energy? Tiny little boluses of quantum energy, popping into and out of our dimension at all times on all frequencies at all amplitudes? We can't harness them because the math we have now, isn't sufficiently evolved to describe how we can access that energy in a useful fashion. Early research seems to indicate that toroidal effects seem important; that low temperatures seem important. But that's all empirical, not predicted nor predictable--because we don't yet have the maths.

Which, writ smaller, is where your research is, IMO. If I'm reading you correctly, what you're doing in the kitchen is research from which money can be made and further research built on--but it's clear from the tone of your posts that you don't feel that you are at any sort of conclusion with this: rather, you are just now discovering what vistas are opening.

We can't refute thermodynamics yet; we can't yet get out more than we put in. But cooking is alchemy rather than a "purer" science; who knows what marvels await?

[mcattaneo23]

This just seems silly to me, while I am all for new techniques and moving forward in cusine, I just do not see the connection between what you are doing at Moto and the preservation of us as a species.

Does cooking with some laser really apply to the world as a whole?? Who the F can afford one anyhow? Where do I get one even if I wanted it...especially if I was starving in Bangladesh??

What are you as a chef doing to help preserve our worlds edible natural resources?? Do you participate in any sort of Chef-Farmer connections to help promote sustainable agriculture or are you too caught up in your "moving forward" agenda to do so? It is this that will allow us to survive as a society, the ability to produce what we need to survive. When you invent something to inject our bodies with the necessary calories we need to survive, let me know. Lets not loose sight of the ultimate goal of our food...survival

Making your kitchen technologically advanced and "state of the art" because you have the financial resources to do so does not make you the leader of a revolution, or the spur of change, it doesn't even make you a great chef...it makes you different.

I do agree that we as a society need to conserve energy and resources, but cooking chips, oranges, or whatever with a laser is not the means to this end. I think your focus should shift back to what you as a COOK should be all about at heart...making people happy.

[inventolux]

This just seems silly to me, while I am all for new techniques and moving forward in cusine, I just do not see the connection between what you are doing at Moto and the preservation of us as a species. 

Its not just that, its paving the way for new innvovative products. Just picture taking your entire kitchen and squishing it into a drawer. Saves energy, sustains food food products and makes sense.

Does cooking with some laser really apply to the world as a whole??  Who the F can afford one anyhow?  Where do I get one even if I wanted it...especially if I was starving in Bangladesh??

The same could have been asked 10 years ago about class 2b laser pointers. There are countless examples of new technology assisting famine riddled countries. Check out "The Life Straw", The 100.00 Lap Top and soon, "The Magic Oven", One must start somewhere rather than end up nowhere.

What are you as a chef doing to help preserve our worlds edible natural resources??  Do you participate in any sort of Chef-Farmer connections to help promote sustainable agriculture or are you too caught up in your "moving forward" agenda to do so?  I do, but I am sure its not enough. I buy local organic and sustainable. That should go without saying at  the high end level. I just choose to spend my time going beyond that. It is this that will allow us to survive as a society, the ability to produce what we need to survive. When you invent something to inject our bodies with the necessary calories we need to survive, let me know.  Lets not loose sight of the ultimate goal of our food...survival That is on its way.

Making your kitchen technologically advanced and "state of the art" because you have the financial resources to do so does not make you the leader of a revolution, or the spur of change, it doesn't even make you a great chef...it makes you different.

As someone that grew up in poverty, I can tell you it's not necessary to have financial resources to invent, but it sure is nice. I never claimed to be a great chef (thats a french term and I am not french), I merely claim to investigate and spread the knowledge which is always open to debate. But debate will not stop our agenda, which is more investigation.

I do agree that we as a society need to conserve energy and resources, but cooking chips, oranges, or whatever with a laser is not the means to this end.  I think your focus should shift back to what you as a COOK should be all about at heart...making people happy.

True, my job in the service industry is to serve others. However my job with CD is to serve those less fortunate from a technological standpoint.

←

Edited February 7, 2007 by inventolux (log)

[inventolux]

Vadouvan, you really are the wind beneath my wings.  Did you know that?

The point is not necessarily to say, "This is what things are and forever more shall they be ever so."  The point is to say, "Here is something new.  What can we do with it and where can we go with it?" Amen, the geeks shall inherit the earth.

Inventolux, have you done any reading into zero-point energy?  Tiny little boluses of quantum energy, popping into and out of our dimension at all times on all frequencies at all amplitudes?  We can't harness them because the math we have now, isn't sufficiently evolved to describe how we can access that energy in a useful fashion.  Early research seems to indicate that toroidal effects seem important; that low temperatures seem important. But that's all empirical, not predicted nor predictable--because we don't yet have the maths. 

I like to wait for things to hit store shelves, so I remain confidential about my innovatios. Having a patent is just as important as being first to market. But the Chinese are investing billions in particle accellerators and this will bend the rules of physics. Who knows where our technology is really at. Check out www.teslamotors.com. That technology has been staring us in the face for a decade. It just took a person with passion for technology to bring it to market. Bye bye BP.

Which, writ smaller, is where your research is, IMO.  If I'm reading you correctly, what you're doing in the kitchen is research from which money can be made and further research built on--but it's clear from the tone of your posts that you don't feel that you are at any sort of conclusion with this: rather, you are just now discovering what vistas are opening.

What goes on in the kitchen at moto is the result of innovation elsewhere. Check out the SR-71 blackbird project. The key is keeping experts in a certain field, in their respective fields and let them move quicker. One of my all time heros is Kelly Johnson: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarence_Johnson. He knew how to get things done.

We can't refute thermodynamics yet; we can't yet get out more than we put in.  But cooking is alchemy rather than a "purer" science; who knows what marvels await?

Nobody for certain.But check this out in the meantime:http://www.pcw.co.uk/personal-computer-world/news/2173169/secretive-company-claims

←

Edited February 7, 2007 by inventolux (log)

[mcattaneo23]

Well I do just want to say thanks for proving my point that no longer is your focus even on the food but rather something competly differnt that I as a cook cannot understand and must plead ignorance, ignorance of which I am not ashamed. I am not trying to enter into an argument about the possibility of a class 4 laser conserving energy and possibly someday saving the human race because I don't know shit about that. What I do know is that culiniarily speaking these techniques are far fetched, and are more novelty than "progress"

[inventolux]

Well I do just want to say thanks for proving my point that no longer is your focus even on the food but rather something competly differnt that I as a cook cannot understand and must plead ignorance, ignorance of which I am not ashamed.  I am not trying to enter into an argument about the possibility of a class 4 laser conserving energy and possibly someday saving the human race because I don't know shit about that.  What I do know is that culiniarily speaking these techniques are far fetched, and are more novelty than "progress"

←

Have you dined at Moto?

[mcattaneo23]

Yes I have...if I had not, I would have nothing to base my argument/opinion upon...

[chromedome]

I have never dined at your restaurant, chef Cantu, and given my budgetary and geographic constraints it is unlikely that I will any time soon. Aside from any consideration of agreeing or disagreeing with your philosophy, though, I have to respect anybody who can stir up so much heated debate on this forum!

I can certainly agree with the notion of patenting an invention or innovation first, and then throwing it out to see what people do with it. The laser itself, after all, was derisively described as "a solution in search of a problem" when it was first invented. My concern, with many of these high-tech solutions, is that the industrial apparatus necessary to create the solution entails significant problems in and of itself. Even a relatively low-tech piece of "greenery" like biodiesel poses questions (how to raise large enough oil crops without massive use of petrochemicals, in the current fashion of large-scale agriculture?).

It's a difficult thing to think through. How much gas would one laser in one restaurant save, as opposed to the emissions and energy usage involved in the manufacture? (Not being obstructive, here, but curious)

[RyuShihan]

Sometimes its the pebble in the pond that causes the ripple that really makes the wave happen.

To agree or disagree are nothing more than opinions but to get the mind working and make people think, that is the true genious of innovation.

[Michaeltheonion]

This topic may very well be dead or neglected. But Omar Im wondering what your stance is on not just engery consumption, something that I am only comming to understand when I fire on a range, or distribution, but production methods. How much of a role does sourcing sustainable ingredients play? Certinaly we need to find ways of getting food to people who dont have access to it, but what ends are we willing to achieve this? I have been sourcing sustainable produce for my restaurant, be it eggs, milk various cuts of meat and one of the problems I run across is quantity. Sometimes there just not enough soundly produced food stuff to compete with the demand. So following this train of thought if we are to feed the increasingly impossible number of people out there would it make sense to raise chickens twice as quick as we do now? Are we meant to unnatraly manipulate our natural environment with a moral blindfold? Is the end result here to sustain the planet or sustain the human race.

I realize that this has completely gone off the tracks from an iron chef discussion, but its something that Ive been asking of alot of chefs in my region.

[inventolux]

Yes I have...if I had not, I would have nothing to base my argument/opinion upon...

←

Fair enough. To each his/her own.

[inventolux]

I have never dined at your restaurant, chef Cantu, and given my budgetary and geographic constraints it is unlikely that I will any time soon.  Aside from any consideration of agreeing or disagreeing with your philosophy, though, I have to respect anybody who can stir up so much heated debate on this forum!

I can certainly agree with the notion of patenting an invention or innovation first, and then throwing it out to see what people do with it.  The laser itself, after all, was derisively described as "a solution in search of a problem" when it was first invented.  My concern, with many of these high-tech solutions, is that the industrial apparatus necessary to create the solution entails significant problems in and of itself.  Even a relatively low-tech piece of "greenery" like biodiesel poses questions (how to raise large enough oil crops without massive use of petrochemicals, in the current fashion of large-scale agriculture?).

It's a difficult thing to think through.  How much gas would one laser in one restaurant save, as opposed to the emissions and energy usage involved in the manufacture?  (Not being obstructive, here, but curious)

←

The use of a laser is the beginning of energy conservation. I can electronically control (with extreme precision) the energy distribution from the energy source to its destination. Gas and or other conventional forms simply are decades behind and will soon be outdated.

Its not that hard to fathom, just 100 years ago, we couldn't even fly.

What would happen if cars in China got twice as much gas mileage as US produced vehicles? Everyone would buy Chinese automobiles (soon they will). The same will hold true for ultra efficient appliances. The appliances I am referring to are patent pending and will not be disclosed by me in a chat room. (Sorry, thats just the way it is for now, I don't make those rules and CD has no time to rewrite them.)

Manufacture and Usage:

Go and purchase a hybrid vehicle....after the battery wears out you will spend in the neighborhood of 8 to 10k to replace it. Is it more or less energy effecient? Well, if it costs you more money, the chances of your money earning program using oil in some way shape or form is pretty good. It doesn't take a Stephen Hawking to figure out where your hard earned "energy" winds up.

The proof is in current and long term usage. Here are the rules of design at CD when it comes to "appliances":

1. Produce less products

2. Make products that perform more tasks and require less replacement.

3. All products should be recyclable and biofriendly.

4. Always follow the antithesis of product develoment, this would be rules 1 to 3.

Lasers have proven their versatility and efficiency over the past 40 years. Lasers are one of many ways we will be introducing consumers to more eco friendly, highly efficient forms of energy transfer systems.

Fuel from corn? Maybe. Biodeisel? Maybe. Lets check it out and maybe we will wind up doing something crazy like finding that coveted "live" energy source that is always renewing itsself.

O

[inventolux]

This topic may very well be dead or neglected. But Omar Im wondering what your stance is on not just engery consumption, something that I am only comming to understand when I fire on a range, or distribution, but production methods. How much of a role does sourcing sustainable ingredients play? Certinaly we need to find ways of getting food to people who dont have access to it, but  what ends are we willing to achieve this?  I have been sourcing sustainable produce for my restaurant, be it eggs, milk various cuts of meat and one of the problems I run across is quantity. Sometimes there just not enough soundly produced food stuff to compete with the demand. So following this train of thought if we are to feed the increasingly impossible number of people out there would it make sense to raise chickens twice as quick as we do now?  Are we meant to unnatraly manipulate our natural environment with a moral blindfold? Is the end result here to sustain the planet or sustain the human race.

I realize that this has completely gone off the tracks from an iron chef discussion, but its something that Ive been asking of alot of chefs in my region.

←

You make a great point, the argument goes both ways. I think we should begin with lower energy consuming appliances. And I mean LOWER. And we are!

Then we begin producing more sustainable food products that will require more initial cost. The French in this case, are way ahead of the US. What must be done next is reconditioning ourselves to understand what is sustainable. Are mashed potatoes any more natural than 2500 calories of extruded solanum tuberosum incorporated with 375 calories of compounded allium sativum? No, its all in the delivery and definition. This is happening, we now see it a Wal Mart. Others will follow and bigger steps will be made.

For chefs, we should buy the sustainable ingredients. That should go without saying at this point. In case it doesn't (and it doesn't) lets figure out the path to success that will in the end, drive profits for larger companies (thats the language they speak), save the food world so we can enjoy it longer (thats the language humanity speaks) and help out humanity in the process.

Also, not all raw foodstuffs can be sustained, thats just the evolution of life on planet earth. Perhaps its too late for those items.

The end result is to coexhist with planet earth. We will not survive without the environment in tact. I believe we do have the drive these changes happen and we certainly have the intelligence. Why not contiune forward and yet again, redefine food? Thats an exciting prospect! I doubt any of us REALLY want to become cave people all over again. Okay, maybe some of us...to each his own.

The coolest part is we may evolve into a much "higher" and intuitive species in the process.

O