Making Liquids Go Bipolar

It takes a lab to make a perfect salad dressing

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

For a slick, supple mouthfeel, there’s nothing like a suspension of fine droplets of oil in water (or vice versa)—what scientists call an emulsion. Cream, butter and chocolate are emulsions, as are gravy, vinaigrette and cheese. But when an emulsion breaks, the results can get ugly: a layer of clear fat floating on top of the gravy boat, a salad dressing that comes out of the bottle all oil and no vinegar, a plate of nachos covered in greasy goo.

Making one means overcoming some powerful forces of nature. The repulsion between water and oil is electric. A water molecule is unbalanced, electrically speaking, in such a way that a polar charge develops among its atoms. As a result, groups of water molecules form exclusive cliques, aka droplets. Oil molecules, in contrast, are nonpolar and hydrophobic. It takes a surprising amount of force to persuade a polar liquid to mingle with a nonpolar one at an intimate level.

A blender is not always up to the job. The human tongue can detect particles (including liquid droplets) that are just seven to 10 microns across, but blenders generally cannot do better than 10 to 12 microns. When the cooks in our research kitchen were working out a recipe for eggless mayonnaise, they relied on a rotor-stator homogenizer instead. This countertop machine spins a small blade (the rotor) at up to 20,000 rpm within a slotted metal sheath (the stator). Tremendous shear forces rip the droplets down to just a few microns.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


For another challenging recipe—a kosher, dairy-free veal “cream”—we tried even bigger iron: an ultrahigh-pressure homogenizer. Our model, which is about the size of a large sink, pressurizes the mixture to as much as 25,000 psi, then slams it into a metal wall to smash it to submicron bits. The result is delicious.

In the finest emulsions, the particles are just a few nanometers in diameter—so tiny the emulsion turns clear. Mountain Dew is a nanoemulsion, for example. To make a transparent nanoemulsion of essential oils from thyme and bay leaf for a chilled chicken soup, our cooks needed a handheld tool because the quantity of liquid was so small.

The solution was an ultrasonic homogenizer, which transforms several hundred watts of power into high-frequency sound waves that induce minuscule bubbles to form in the liquid. These cavitation bubbles then implode, tearing droplets apart as they do. The high-pitched tool gives new meaning to whine and dine.

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe