|
|
|
|
|
|
by notfed
1650 days ago
|
|
|
The controversy is that it twists the standard definition of "on": the video boldly asserts its shocking answer of 1/d at first, only later to admit (with very little clarity) that the 1/d answer is only true if your definition of "on" is a small electromagnetic spike. This also means that the "misconception" claim is really just click-bait and really there was never any misconception. |
|
|