Errors

A lot of people who drive might know, or think they know, this stuff and still be crappy drivers because THEY DON"T PAY ATTENTION!   

It's definitely easy to overwhelm a beginner (in almost any activity) with too much information.  And people who have a very kinesthetic learning focus (what you called "hands-on") will probably not benefit much from any type of book learning, or thinking too analytically about what they are doing.

It's a long way from there to suggest that talking/thinking about the physics behind a sport/activity (or, at a higher level, theoretical applications of the physics) is not helpful.  Sure, you can think about your skis like a black box -- e.g. "tip them on their edges and they turn".  And while you're out there actually skiing, that might be the level you want to work at most of the time.  But if you don't have at least some understanding of the physics behind how they work, you won't be able to predict how they might respond in different situations, or how to adjust for different conditions.  You can learn by personally experiencing lots and lots of different situations, but this can be laborious (or dangerous, or impossible), and you could be forced suddenly into a situation you haven't experienced before and not know what to do.

At the very least, even if you don't want to know about this, you do want to benefit from it.  This means you probably want whoever is teaching or coaching you to have a lot of boring background knowledge.  (If you're teaching yourself, you may have a very hard time making progress at high levels without understanding the fundamentals of what you're doing.)  I'm sure there are some NASCAR drivers who drive mostly by instinct, feel, and experience -- but they sure have a crew chief that knows the physics and engineering.

Why Golf is played at all puzzles me to this day. Why not just go for a hike and safe money by not loosing balls?
Anyway, if you are just talking about skiing in general and lets say you manage to ski one way or another for a full day and have a blast then there is no error in that.
Should you be able to find out what made you get the muscle ache the next day, then that will cause you very quickly to eliminate that error.
Accept the fact that nobody can ski without an error. There are many reasons and they are allowed to happen. You just may want to know how to correct them.

Hey - there aren't any errors in my skiing - it's just riddled with "learning opportunities"...

---
Much of our technical discussion here is often misinterpreted as being 'deliverable information' for students on the hill.  It's not.   Instead, we discuss the minutia here in order to better understand exactly what is happening, how it's happening, and why.  We dig into the nitty-gritty here to validate observations, analyze proposed movements and relevant outcomes vs inputs, and to explore alternatives - or entirely new possibilities.  The intellectual outcome of technical discussion is our better understanding of skiing.

From this, the quality of our interaction with students on the hill is greatly improved because we show up with far greater clarity and insight on teaching methods and techniques than we might otherwise possess.   These technical discussions, while expressed competitively here, are a great source of ideas that become generally accepted over time. 

Functional Application in the field isn't anything like the investigative analysis done here. 

Unfortunately the technical precision with which we detect and define "errors" here generally doesn't take real-world probability and situational application into consideration.  Here, the many pattern nuances discussed are actually just isolated case studies examined to a specific purpose or compared to a preferential measuring stick.

Such technical examinations of individual/isolated patterns may not help the average skier as presented here but it certainly helps those of us interested in professional-level teaching and training.  All the teaching and people-skills in the world are useless if we don't possess an accurate understanding of the concepts we propose to teach. 

In fact, I'd suggest having excellent 'leadership, motivational and influencing skill' is downright dangerous without accurate content since this leader/teacher would be so very effective at delivering misinformation.

.ma