How wrong can you be?
IF it WAS aerodynamically unstable, then how come there have been thousands of successful flights?
Such illogical statements don't add to the discussion, but make a mockery of it.
I dunno... how wrong can you be? It looks like you are trying to make it a competition or something. those 3 sentences have an amazing hit rate for wrongness. I'm not sure I'll be able to keep up but hey, I'll give it a red hot go:
Now. In absence of you going and reading up on control theory or even just feedback in systems I'll break what I said down into smaller steps for you, and try to explain the terminology so you can keep up with the discussion and stop resorting to derailing the discussion and making a mockery of it by acting abusively.
So, what I'm talking about with this new plane, is there's a problematic state variable in a flying plane "system". This state variable is either "pitch" or "angle of attack" (whichever it happens to be, the particular one is unimportant for this discussion.. possibly it's also tied to a second state variable, which I'd expect might be "thrust", maybe there's even more associated variables.. but I'm leaving that out for the sake of simplicity.. only one contains the feedback mechanism when feedback starts, so it's the critical one here)
1) This state variable, for some range of values, has a positive feedback loop. That is - for a range of values of the state variable, with no control operating on that variable, that state variable will increase without bound (well, until hitting a natural limit of the system, stalling the plane, and killing everyone onboard)
2) The positive feedback effect on that state variable is literally a case of instability for that state value. Other 737s in flight do not have this positive feedback on this state variable and therefore this state variable isn't unstable for other 737s in flight.
3) Instability in any one (or more) state variables of a system literally defines that system to be unstable. that's, like, the definition of an unstable system... Now, other planes that don't have positive feedback in any state variables don't meet this definition. This plane does, though.
4) Now, we need to take a moment and back off from the definition above and realise that a system being "unstable" doesn't necessarily mean the whole system just oscillates chaotically in the full range of all its state variables and is impossible to control in any way from the instant it starts in motion (that would be your worst case for instability in a system)
5) In the case of this plane, instability most likely makes it harder to control the plane when the system hits a state variable value that brings in positive feedback... Which is exactly what the software bodge is there to try and avoid in this plane, but seems it did that in a terrible way. The very existence of this software bodge tells us explicitly that Boeing knew that not only is the flying plane unstable in this variable, it's bad enough that the instability needs to be countered (or masked) You don't bodge software like that up and put it inside a life critical control system just because you're bored on a rainy weekend, you know.
PS, I'm not an expert on aerodymanics here, but it's my understanding that a lot of fighter planes are deliberately aerodynamically unstable in different ways because it allows them to do fast manoeuvres they couldn't do if they were stable... BUT fighter planes have ejector seats for that reason, and aren't full of passengers for that reason (OK, and probably other reasons...)
Anyway, here's some fun discussion on fighter plane stability I googled for you. Enjoy. But please be very careful not to sign in and abuse the people on this stack exchange about how they are stupid and not contributing to a discussion on fighter plane instability and control, because if fighter planes were unstable how could they ever fly, and thousands of fighter plane flights happen every day.
https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/8049/are-fighter-jets-designed-to-be-so-inherently-unstable-that-a-human-cant-fly-on