The paper is more detailed than relying on the mouth, and you know all kinds of research background, analysis methods, experimental verification and references clearly. Li Yongle is good at math, but he is really not good at science. I criticized him many times. Students welcome Li Yongle, and I like him, too, not science.
China fast food culture. It doesn't matter whether the roadside stalls are sanitary or not. The important thing is that I like eating. Five-star hotels are rubbish because I can't afford to stay. It is really difficult to do popular science for some things. Most people don't do research on technical terms with low education level or academic qualifications, so they often comment on popular science videos such as quantum, photon, time travel, multiple cosmology, relativity, string theory, gravity, dark matter and dark energy. Only a large number of people watch it because they are curious. Because they simply don't understand, don't understand, and some of them are not popular enough, there are all kinds of disputes about the popular science video authors themselves, and even about the popular science knowledge of frontier physics, and there is no definite conclusion, which leads to a lot of speculation.
At the bottom of the last comment, there will inevitably be some views of God, Buddhism, Taoism and Yi. Of course, some of them are similar. For example, the topic of relativity is relativity, which is exactly the same as the yin-yang theory of the Book of Changes, and the topics are all around relativity. Other modern physics and ancient books also have something in common. Although the ideas and wisdom put forward by the ancients are beyond the times, we can't belittle modern science with our blind identification. I think it's all the same effect. Why not take the essence and discard the dross? There is no need for people who like modern science to belittle each other or even contradict each other because of their different views. All for learning and getting to know each other.
People in any celestial body in the universe think that they have the fastest time and the wrong details. You have a great misunderstanding about the speed of movement. The speed of motion must have a reference, and no celestial body thinks it is the fastest. To compare the speed of all celestial bodies, we must choose a reference object, such as the earth, and compare the motion of all other celestial bodies with the earth, which is also the relative speed of relativity. So since all celestial bodies are compared with the earth, it is impossible to get it, and any celestial body thinks it is the fastest. What you misunderstand is that every celestial body thinks it is the fastest, so everyone in every celestial body takes himself as the reference, so every comparison changes the reference. Planet A thinks he is the fastest, while people on Planet A think he is the fastest, and Planet B thinks he is the fastest. Similarly, it takes its own planet as the reference object, and the detailed reference object changes every time, so it is obviously wrong to take this standard as the reference object.
The teacher's role is to preach, teach, dispel doubts, and popularize knowledge! A high school student can teach primary school students well after training! A doctoral student may not be able to teach pupils well! The emphasis is different! The height of the question should be to ask a physicist! Not a teacher! You can talk to Yang Zhenning and so on! Li Yongle should be affirmed in popular science work. After all, it is enough to popularize knowledge or know, and at most it is to stimulate interest. I think it's okay to sacrifice professionalism for popularity.
He is just a teacher, not a physicist, nor an expert and scholar. Look at his profile, he just said that he is a high school math and physics teacher and a popular science video author. The teacher should impart what he has learned to the students and stimulate their interest in scientific knowledge. If he knew the problems you mentioned, the Nobel Prize in Physics would be his. People are only highly educated teachers, and they only talk about basic knowledge, which is easy to understand and explain. Don't think that only your own level is good, and the motivation and purpose of learning vary from person to person. If you are at a high level, you will communicate with people who do scientific research. Why are you looking for Li Yongle? Everyone likes Mr. Li Yongle for a reason. Everyone knows that he is not a great scientist.
I think Li Yongle is good, but so is Guo Wei. At least his explanation is clear and accurate. Li Yongle is popular but not easy to understand. Some mistakes have been made in some places, mainly because these places are not Li Yongle's strong points. I have always felt that a hundred flowers blossom and debate can make science deeply rooted in people's hearts. Isn't that great? Real scientists don't care about explaining entropy. For example, if you ask a physicist what entropy is, it is estimated that he will not give you a detailed explanation, even if it is detailed and accurate, you will not understand it. So you need some professional knowledge, not very strong, but you can explain some scientific disciplines with ordinary patience but not necessarily absolute accuracy, which is easier to be accepted by the general public, so it is more recognized by people.
First of all, we have to admit Lao Li's talent. Besides, we can't criticize Lao Guo blindly. I happen to think that Lao Guo has courage and simplicity. It's not a question of right or wrong now. Just like brainwashing through pyramid schemes, no one is allowed to blaspheme his idol. Even if you are right, I think this cheese is not bad. One day, someone moved this cheese and attacked it, forgetting that it was scientific knowledge sharing. I think it is not a good thing that everyone supports Lao Li. He made a small mistake in popular science today, and others may make more mistakes because of his mistakes, because he is a public figure and a life guide touted by many fans, which has deviated from the original intention of knowledge sharing. What Lao Guo said was inappropriate, but people at least pointed it out, and some people dared not point it out even if they saw it. This kind of courage is worth encouraging, instead of criticizing Lao Guo from the so-called moral incompetence. At least no one dares to touch Lao Li's cheese yet. Wake up, crazy netizens.
I remember reading a story about a Daniel in science who seems to be a Nobel Prize winner. He made a report that he read the first lesson of a primary school science textbook and found that the textbook made a "mistake" at the beginning. At the beginning of the textbook, I asked a question: What makes the wound toy move? Then the textbook gives the answer: energy. Daniel said that such an answer didn't bring anything useful to children except instilling an obscure word "energy". Such criticism can be said to be very severe. But Daniel didn't say that the author "didn't pretend to understand" or "misled other people's children".
It is good for middle school teachers to teach their majors well, and to do popular science should also be within their own cognitive range. It is not good to know astronomy, geography and gynecological diseases. For the sake of popular science, some things are simply mechanically copying popular science. To put it bluntly, it is for traffic and eyeballs. There is another reason. Miss Li's mistake is actually irrelevant. Most people will forget the specific content, especially one of the data, and only have a general understanding of the video content, thus becoming interested in some sciences. This is why it is called popular science video, not teaching video. Popular science videos spread the concept of knowledge, not specific knowledge, and their target audience is unspecified people. Therefore, using the requirements of teaching videos to approve popular science videos will cause resentment. Therefore, if Teacher Li released a video that said 1+ 1=3 that day, then it was Teacher Li who was criticized! If you don't believe me, please remember yourself. How much do you remember about Teacher Li's popular science videos?
I absolutely agree with scientific correction, although the tone is a little excited, but on the other hand, how negative is it that a teacher says something wrong for millions of people? This is not right. The key is wrong. It's the basic problem. This is just a mistake. The point is that people dare to say anything. On this premise, we can understand Guo Wei's performance. I absolutely agree with scientific correction, although the tone is a little excited, but on the other hand, how negative is it that a teacher says something wrong for millions of people? This is not right. The key is wrong. It's the basic problem. This is just a mistake. The point is that people dare to say anything. On this premise, we can understand Guo Wei's performance.
There is no question of whose level is higher. Teacher Li Yongle talks too much. It is impossible for a person to be so professional on all issues. There are too many problems, involving all aspects of mathematics and physics, and no one can guarantee that there will be no problems. If Mr. Li Yongle is asked to talk about some of his best problems, the chances of making mistakes will be much smaller. If Guo is asked to talk about different problems every day, it won't be long before he finishes what he is good at and then talks about what he is not familiar with. It is very commendable and necessary for someone to correct mistakes in the lecture. But be calm.
To be fair, what is 100% correct? In addition, teacher Li Yongle made popular science videos, which let you know a little about science, change your interest and let you learn spontaneously. After learning to a certain extent, you naturally know that this is a bit wrong and may not be rigorous. But the goal is not to make a series of flawless videos. On the other hand, so-and-so is rigorous (maybe), but who knows what you are doing? There is such a heart to do science popularization, focusing on science popularization rather than scientific research. Finally, I have such a heart to do popular science, which has enlightened many children and enlightened many adults! Be respected by everyone! But it happened that there are such a small group of people who don't know whether they are envious or grandstanding, maliciously smearing attacks! If you have any questions, point them out. If you are not convinced, you can explain it correctly on the screen! Please don't deliberately kill, kill, and it's no use doing anything that harms others and does not benefit yourself!
Teacher Li Yongle's main purpose is to popularize science! ! The purpose is very important. On this basis, the importance of right and wrong itself will be slightly less than the two right and wrong in teaching. What do you mean? For example, if you are not interested in a popular science knowledge at all, it doesn't matter whether this knowledge is right or wrong, because if you are not interested, you will forget it. Right or wrong is the same, just for fun. If you are interested, you might as well check some other materials, so that you will naturally find out in the process of learning: "Hey? That buddy seems to have said something wrong here, "and then you learned the correct knowledge.
Expertise in technical field. Some people may not be able to express their knowledge well and make people understand. Although some people may have almost the same knowledge, they can show what they know completely. This is the ability that a teacher should have. Mr Li Yongle has this ability. Whether he has the highest education or not, he can make students understand. This is commendable.
Personally, I think that catching others' mistakes, mocking others and even personal attacks are not recognized by the universal values of society and violate the social moral system. Therefore, Mr. Guo's behavior will not be supported by most people, and I believe we will stay away from such people in real life.