From a book review: The authors blithely claim that there are "three basic ways to store energy: as heat, as electric...
JohnSummersMarch 5, 2024
I understand the correct answer, but I think the questions wording was deliberately structured to apply to another answer choice.
I took "basic ways" to mean simple. Using context, the author says they themselves cannot think of any way to store the energy according to one of the basics (I still don't understand why this automatically means that the method in question is wrong). I could have no idea how something works, but that does not mean it doesn't work. Further, the introduction of physics students mentioning other forms of energy storage suggests that those methods would be more complex, but basic for the students. A then, would be the correct answer because it points out that any form of energy storage is basic if you know how it works. Is there any way to not fall into a trap like this? It doesn't feel like I'm overthinking the question, but clearly I am doing something wrong.
Reply
Create a free account to read and
take part in forum discussions.
I think you're reading ideas into the passage that aren't there. The author doesn't quite say that they can't figure out how to store energy with electricity, they said that they don't know how this can be done effectively. This is one line of attack, that one of the allegedly basic methods isn't actually effective. That said I think the second clause of that sentence is more telling.by saying that almost any student would know of other extremely common methods (like batteries or nuclear power) the author attacks the idea that those are the only basic categories. The passage says nothing about knowing how it works. The point the author is making is that even non experts are aware of these methods, thus undermining the idea that the three listed are the basic methods.
