We should rather call this a beta process in my opinion than a beta decay

Agreed. I should have stopped at "a proton gets transmuted" without the mention of a "beta decay". (Didn't have the term you mentioned -beta process- in mind).

I'm not used to being super accurate with the wording (which is something I've been learning to do since my very first article in stemsocial and my interactions with you hahaha) which I very much appreciate by the way :)

---

As for the rest of what you mentioned, I will talk in general as I completely agree and am aware of most of it.

The issue I'm always facing when writing is to what audience is it directed at? This has always affected my writing about physics subjects.
Many friends who are curious and like to read a bit about physics, have suggested to not go technical ("dumb your articles down" they say), in discord and in comments on older posts. And sadly, I have lost some readers because they felt I was going too technical even with my "child's play" way of describing things.

(I'm sure you can relate somewhat for the difference of writing/talking about a subject between your actual research and work -your physics papers, which are very hard even for me- vs -blogs on on here, which I somewhat can understand-)

For example, they are not interested in the detailed processes that take place but in the general idea. (Not that I even know all the details either, nor can they be included in the general purpose subject)

Almost everywhere in the "catchy" blogs and even in schools, they just say 4 hydrogen atoms combine to make a helium in fusion reaction, and that's that...

I wanted to go over a bit of the reactions, but mainly was about the general quantum tunneling idea being the key for fusion.

---

Lastly, I truly appreciate your input and corrections. And I want to ask you, what should I do? Be more technical and precise in my future articles (which I'm not sure I'd do great either xD ) keep them the way they are, or make them more catchy for the other audience (which means even less details and technicalities)?

In any case, I love your corrections and pointing out stuff. I learn a lot from them, correct and expand my personal knowledge. And I'm sure that applies to anyone reading the article/comments.
So for that, I thank you! And please keep doing it :)

Cheers! <3