News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Finding Paths of Least Action with Gradient Descent by danbmil99 on Tuesday April 29, 2025 @07:35PM (#43839355)
> Nevertheless in a deterministic system you can know a future state without calculating intermediary states.

Exactly wrong. See the halting problem

Re:Finding Paths of Least Action with Gradient Descent by frutiger on Tuesday April 29, 2025 @10:29PM (#43840588)
Isn't the halting problem about knowing all future states and not a future state?
Re:Finding Paths of Least Action with Gradient Descent by froh on Wednesday April 30, 2025 @12:39AM (#43841342)
...unless the input tape also is deterministic.

"deterministic system" is not "deterministic program"

Re:Finding Paths of Least Action with Gradient Descent by coderenegade on Wednesday April 30, 2025 @12:57AM (#43841416)
You know the initial conditions, the position function x(t), the velocity function v(t), and acceleration is constant. Why can't we evaluate the state at any point in time without having to calculate previous states?
Re:Finding Paths of Least Action with Gradient Descent by kadoban on Thursday May 01, 2025 @01:05AM (#43853892)
A deterministic system isn't a necessary or sufficient condition to be able to calculate a particular future state without calculating intermediate states.

It just happens to work for the system you propose, not all systems of that class.

Re:Finding Paths of Least Action with Gradient Descent by revskill on Wednesday April 30, 2025 @02:37AM (#43841919)
Not everyone understands that problem.
Re:Finding Paths of Least Action with Gradient Descent by ajkjk on Wednesday April 30, 2025 @04:26PM (#43850272)
How so?