The same is true about the terms "waves" and "fields" when it comes to quantum mechanics. They're analogies. The concepts need names, but I think they do more

The same is true about the terms "waves" and "fields" when it comes to quantum mechanics. They're analogies. The concepts need names, but I think they do more harm than good because people then start with a mental model of a membrane or a surface - something they have experience seeing waves in. And then after 1 or 2 steps where the analogy helps, it breaks down, and people start being confused. Of course the alternative isn't any better. If they had named it a "Wazoo function" and a "Quantum Flarg" everyone would've just kept asking "OK but what IS a Wazoo? What IS a Flarg" and not been satisfied with a "Yeah, it's a fundamental own thing". Feynman, of course, has a pretty definitive response on the difficulty of this problem: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dp4dpeJVDxs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dp4dpeJVDxs