That's all I'm asking for, just an approximation of why it doesn't matter.
The problem is that any highly technical subject necessarily involves lots of jargon and whatnot in order to discuss it. It's no different for physics. Economics is kind of a unique problem in that there's a pretty broad intersection with public policy, so there's a lot of pressure to explain things "in layman's terms." Physics by and large doesn't much have this problem.
My point is just that challenging someone to explain a technical subject in layman's terms is often an unfair challenge. Technical jargon and the like don't exist because people want to lock Joe Sixpack out of understanding their field; it exists because without it the stuff is really fucking hard to understand.
I understand why jargon exists and I understand it can be difficult to explain technical concepts in layman's terms. Even though I don't remember most of it, I've studied 3 sections of physics, I've studied differential equations, linear algebra, up through 3 dimensional calculus and early advanced mathematics (set theory, relations, yada, yada). I've studied computer science including assembly, c, and c++ and data structures and algorithm analysis. I'm not claiming I'm smart or that that stuff is even advanced. Hell, I made it through so it can't be. I'm just saying that I've been exposed to the importance of specialized terms. Even after moving to the dreaded liberal arts, there's still technical jargon that's used for specificity.
But I've also learned through that experience that concepts can be explained in layman's terms. If someone's not willing to make the effort, I might as well go ask a shaman.
Edit: So instead of just telling Jason they aren't important, say why. If they are too complex for him to understand without more training, then at least say that. If he doesn't want to, then he should say he doesn't want to.