Someone took the time to read your article and give you their critical impression, and you respond here essentially by saying that they are wrong and that they should read another article you wrote to correct their thinking.

This comes off as condescending and dismissive. It's a poor way to treat people who have taken the time to engage with your content, especially if engagement is what you want, which appears to be the case given your other replies on this topic.

Take the time to respond to them directly rather than pointing them towards more content you've written, even if it means repeating ideas you've written elsewhere.

This approach has a number of benefits:

1. It has the effect of presenting what you've read elsewhere inline (most readers won't click that link)

2. It gives you an opportunity to revisit and refine your own thinking, and

3. It forces you to think carefully about the criticisms levied

And most importantly, it reciprocates the effort they've put into reading your post and responding to you so that you don't come off like a jerk.

Sorry, you're right. I was maybe too focused on being efficient rather than polite. I'll edit my comment

This is incorrect. Learning is doing. I know all about all sorts of things. That doesn’t mean I can do many of them.

I read that article, and your introduction on learning quantum mechanics is actually how I learned quantum mechanics! Or at least, about the known quantum particles in the standard model and their properties and behavior.

This is how I learn basically everything. That and practical application, so I'd learn cooking by cooking but I'd learn about information theory by just reading for hours at a time and falling down one hole after another. All this makes me wonder, where do you get the "you have 4 working memory slots" thing from? And how would you actually go about forcing things into long term memory?