科学与数学amasci.com编辑精选
为什么电这么难懂？(1989)
Why is electricity so hard to understand? (1989)
2016 — 2021，它一次次回到首页
黑点是上首页（≥ 50 分）的那次投稿，空心点是没冲上去的投稿，点越大分数越高。
导读
这是科普作者 William Beaty 写于 1989 年的经典文章，探讨为什么“电”这个概念如此难以理解。作者认为问题主要出在教学上：教科书和教师用词含糊（“电流”“电荷”“电能”混为一谈），并灌输了许多似是而非的错误直觉，导致学习者建立了错误的心智模型。文章逐一剖析这些常见误解，例如“电子以光速流动”“电能像水一样在导线里流动”等。
为什么经久不衰：它指出人们对电的困惑往往源于被教错了，而不是自己笨；这种“先破除错误直觉”的教学思路对任何学科的学习都有启发，因此多年后仍被反复推荐。
HN 评论精选
错误直觉危害巨大，直觉只有在扎实理论基础上才有价值
我觉得我拿电子工程学位的时间，有一半以上花在“忘掉”那些被灌输的直觉但错误的观念上。我幸运地有一位出色的高中物理老师，避开了许多坑；可惜我又用自己误导性的自学补了些坑。这段经历教会我主动怀疑“直觉”和“常识”——直觉并非没有价值（恰恰相反，从设计到维护它都极其宝贵），但只有建立在扎实的理论基础之上才有用。在那之前，它只是人们为了显得懂行、又不愿啃数学而走的（很糟糕的）捷径。
notalaser查看英文原文
I think more than half the time I spent earning my EE degree has been spent unlearning the intuitive (but wrong) things that I was liberally taught. I was fortunate enough to have an exceptional Physics teacher in high school, who managed to avoid a lot of the bullshit that less fortunate students were fed; sadly, I compensated that with some of my own (misguided) self-study. This experience also taught me to actively mistrust "intuition" and "common sense". Not that there isn't value in intuition (quite the contrary, it's priceless, from design to maintenance), but it's only useful when it rests on a solid theoretical foundation. Prior to earning that foundation, it's nothing but a (very bad) shortcut that people take because they want to feel knowledgeable, but don't want to invest the effort of going through all that math mumbo jumbo.
用微分形式重新表述电磁学会更优雅
当用微分形式的语言来表述电磁学时，它会优雅得多。参见 [1]。
amelius查看英文原文
Electromagnetics becomes much more elegant when cast in the language of differential forms. See e.g. [1]. [1] http://www.uio.no/studier/emner/matnat/fys/FYS4160/v08/undervisningsmateriale/Kursmateriell/forms_teaching_warnick.pdf
风/声音类比是理解电荷流与能量流区别的绝佳工具
很喜欢这篇文章。破除常见误解是帮人建立更好心智模型的好方法，希望更多大学教师这么做。如果没时间读全文，至少读这段：空气是实体，声音是在空气中传播的波，风是空气的流动；同样，电荷是实体，电能是经由电荷柱传播的波，电流是已有电荷的流动。把“电荷流动”和“能量流动”混为一谈，就像把风和声音搞混一样——相信电子以光速流动，就好比相信你说话时空气必须以 720 英里时速飞到远方听者的耳朵里。
keepper查看英文原文
Love this article. As a former EE ( been in software too long and never actually worked as an EE LOL ), demystifying common misconceptions about a subject is a great way to get people to build a better mental model. Wish more educators would do this in college/university. But, if you don’t read the whole article, do read this tidbit. “ ...little use by educators of the wind/sound electrical analogy: AIR is a physical substance. SOUND is a wave that propagates rapidly through a volume of air. WIND is a flowing motion of air already present. —- ELECTRIC CHARGES are a physical substance. ELECTRIC ENERGY is a wave that travels via a column of charge. ELECTRIC CURRENT is a flowing motion of the charge already present. —- The confusion between charge-flow and energy-flow is similar to confusion between wind versus sound. Do you know that sound is not wind? To believe that electrons flow at the speed of light is similar to believing that air must travel at 720mph out of your mouth to distant ears. “
文章内容有价值但结构混乱，先讲正确概念再讲误解会更好
内容看起来很有意思，但写作风格和排版让我有点晕。更简洁、结构清晰会好很多：每个主题应明确指出哪里错了、正确的是什么。最好先给出“电这个词的正确定义是什么”，再讲电荷、能量、电流的正确定义和区别。先讲正确的，再讲误解及其后果，这样的结构对我更友好。我读到最后，对电的理解和开始时一样困惑。
soneca查看英文原文
It looks like interesting content, but I got a little confused by the writing style and general layout. A more succinct, clearly defined structure would help me a lot. Each topic could be clearer on what is wrong and how is the right way. It would help a lot just to start with a clear: "What is the right definition of the word electricity?". Then, maybe a "What is "electrical phenomena" and some examples". "Correct definition and differences of electric charge, energy and current". For me personally, a structure that explains what is the right thing first, then goes on about misconceptions and consequence of misconceptions is much better. I became lost while reading this and finished with basically the same confused and mistaken understanding of what is electricity as I began.
历次讨论
同类还值得读
如果月球只有 1 像素：一个极其精确的太阳系模型（2014）
If the moon were only 1 pixel: A tediously accurate solar system model (2014)
一个网页版太阳系模型，以“如果月亮只有 1 像素”的真实比例呈现：你必须一路横向滚动，才能体会行星之间空旷到何等程度。
科学与数学上首页 7 次 · 2014–2025joshworth.com编辑精选沉浸式线性代数（2016）
Immersive Linear Algebra (2016)
《Immersive Linear Algebra》是一本完全免费、开放在线的线性代数“超文本教科书”，其最大特色是大量可交互的图形：读者可以直接拖动、操作图中的向量、矩阵和变换…
科学与数学上首页 5 次 · 2015–2024immersivemath.com编辑精选如何将贝果切成两个相连的半环（2009）
How to Slice a Bagel into Two Linked Halves (2009)
数学家 George Hart 的经典教程，演示如何用一刀把贝果切成两个相互扣住的环，并附上切割步骤与数学原理。
科学与数学上首页 5 次 · 2009–2022georgehart.com“犹太问题”：一组用于歧视的数学题
Jewish problems
一篇 arXiv 论文，整理并讨论苏联时期犹太学生在申请大学数学系时被问到的特殊数学难题：这些题往往有简单解法却极难想到，被用作面试中拒绝犹太考生的手段。
科学与数学上首页 5 次 · 2011–2021arxiv.org你的身体并非为长久而造：人类死亡率数据的一课
Your body wasn’t built to last: a lesson from human mortality rates
文章从人类死亡率随年龄变化的统计规律出发，解释身体并非为长久使用而设计：年轻时死亡风险较低，之后随年龄近似指数上升，像复杂系统在不断累积损伤。
科学与数学上首页 5 次 · 2009–2018gravityandlevity.wordpress.com