ThePortForum.com

Andy Velebil wrote:I live in a dessert

Really? Is it a treacle tart? Or a salted caramel ice-cream sandwich..?
Sorry.

djewesbury wrote:

Andy Velebil wrote:I live in a dessert

Really? Is it a treacle tart? Or a salted caramel ice-cream sandwich..?
Sorry.

I prefer sea salt caramel with a vanilla bean base. But sometimes just plain 'ol chocolate will do

djewesbury wrote:I would have thought that the expansion of the glass (are we talking microns here?) would be even in each direction - meaning that the space inside the bottle would actually contract...

The external size would increase by more than the internal size, but both would increase.

Figure 2 of this essay entitled Thermal expansion measurement of glasses suggests, at relevant temperatures, expansion of less than 10 parts per million per degree C. So heating by 50°C would expand the glass by less than 500 ppm. For a 20mm hole that’s an expansion of less than ≈ 0.01mm. Surely too small to matter.

jdaw1 wrote:

djewesbury wrote:I would have thought that the expansion of the glass (are we talking microns here?) would be even in each direction - meaning that the space inside the bottle would actually contract...

The external size would increase by more than the internal size, but both would increase.

Figure 2 of this essay entitled Thermal expansion measurement of glasses suggests, at relevant temperatures, expansion of less than 10 parts per million per degree C. So heating by 50°C would expand the glass by less than 500 ppm. For a 20mm hole that’s an expansion of less than ≈ 0.01mm. Surely too small to matter.

Fascinating. So.. who did we conclude was right / was wrong / could remember the question?

You just don't get this level of debate on wine-pages.com.

djewesbury wrote:Fascinating. So.. who did we conclude was right / was wrong / could remember the question?

I think we all agreed that buying Niepoort 1997 is a silly thing to do

DRT wrote:

djewesbury wrote:Fascinating. So.. who did we conclude was right / was wrong / could remember the question?

I think we all agreed that buying Niepoort 1997 is a silly thing to do

+1

But if you have bought some you should open it and drink it and hope it shows as well as the one which Gerwin had.

And if you bought more than one, you should drink more than one.

AHB wrote:But if you have bought some you should open it and drink it and hope it shows as well as the one which Gerwin had.

And if you bought more than one, you should drink more than one.

I had one that was quite nice, too. And I still have 5 more from the same 6-pack.

I had an okay one too. here

I recalled it being very spirity though.

I bought a 750ml and 3 375mls. We are drinking D80 tonight, and then away for the weekend (drinking a D63 in Edinburgh, in the building in which it was bottled). So it'll be next week before I get the chance to do this, bit at the earliest opportunity I will open the 750 and one of the 375s, and of course post a TN here.

I like (as in, don't like) the fact that Roy makes you justify your TNs. 'What do you mean, rich heat? Explain yourself!'

djewesbury wrote: I like (as in, don't like) the fact that Roy makes you justify your TNs. 'What do you mean, rich heat? Explain yourself!'

well there could be cause for confusion with just heat

i mean if you had to bburn phone books for heat im sure you'd get that ink and newpaper smell

vs if you can afford some pine wood you get that fresh pine smell.

see how important the adjectives are?

djewesbury wrote:I like (as in, don't like) the fact that Roy makes you justify your TNs. 'What do you mean, rich heat? Explain yourself!'

Did you understand what I meant by "rich heat" without the further explanation I posted after Roy's question?

Glenn E. wrote:

djewesbury wrote:I like (as in, don't like) the fact that Roy makes you justify your TNs. 'What do you mean, rich heat? Explain yourself!'

Did you understand what I meant by "rich heat" without the further explanation I posted after Roy's question?

see my definition =)

btw Fonseca 66 has the qualities you describe

g-man wrote:btw Fonseca 66 has the qualities you describe

Yes, I know. My point was that Roy's curiosity about what I meant was perfectly reasonable, and not a demand that I explain myself.

I got it, I mean, a rich heat is not thin or too fiery.. But I am willing to accept that Roy was just curious!

AHB wrote:But if you have bought some you should open it and drink it and hope it shows as well as the one which Gerwin had.

And if you bought more than one, you should drink more than one.

Time to pop some corks...