How we build and review explanations

Start with something you can observe

Each lesson connects a question, a control and a visible consequence. A written explanation describes the same relationship, so you can learn from the page even when the interactive model is unavailable.

Build from sources and show the limits

We use reference material and primary technical sources to check explanations. References appear beside the written lesson. Original models may combine Blender-built assets with geometry created in code. Imported assets carry source and licence information in the relevant lesson.

Models simplify the world. A cutaway may remove a supporting casing; an animation may use ideal motion and omit friction or fluid flow. Every lesson states its assumptions. Educational models are not manufacturing drawings or substitutes for engineering or medical advice.

Review before adding a lesson to the collection

Our review rubric covers accuracy, geometry, explanatory clarity, interaction and rendering reliability. It also requires source checks, mechanical checks, browser inspection and a separate review. Automated checks catch implementation errors; they do not establish scientific accuracy.

AI tools assist with research, code and model construction. A separate agent review is a software review, not a claim of professional certification. Recorded model assessments are editorial judgments, not customer ratings. Unfinished experiments remain drafts.

Your notebook stays in your browser

Saving a lesson uses local browser storage. There is no account or cross-device sync. Clearing site data clears the notebook.