> equations are not explanations. calling a theorem partially correct because you dont know why it works is totally unrelated. either the theorem accurately rep

> equations are not explanations. calling a theorem partially correct because you dont know why it works is totally unrelated. either the theorem accurately represents and predicts reality, or it doesnt. no equation says why itself works, thats nonsense talk. Bernoulli's principle and e.g. the equal-travel-time Bernoulli explanation of lift are totally different things. The point the article is making is that common explanations of lift like the latter are typically incomplete or misleading, if not outright incorrect, regardless of whether they invoke uncontroversial scientific results. The article also discusses what an actual correct and complete explanation might look like, but (IIRC) outright states that the formal theoretical side of things is uncontroversial as it stands today.