Hacker News Reader

Comment by moktonar | Hacker News Reader

It’s the error with the ground truth that you can’t predict. Otherwise you would just be able to cancel it out. You can only predict probability distributions..

View on HN

If you're saying that it's the uncertainty in the initial measurement, then we're in agreement. If the initial measurement were perfect, the only source of error would be the finite timestep. N-body simulation itself is deterministic, and so the only source of randomness is our uncertainty about the object's true mass, size, shape, position, velocity, etc.

The N-body _reality_ _might_ be deterministic. The N-body simulation using digital computers will technically still introduce errors because of the time steps even if you had perfect knowledge of initial conditions.

The errors are deterministic. Determinism has nothing to do with the existence of errors, it's about uncertainty. They're different things. A system that is deterministic will produce the same results every time given the same initial conditions. If there are numerical errors, they will be identical for each run. A non-deterministic system will give you different results every time given the same initial conditions, with some variance. You can still have numerical errors in such a system.

Ironically, reality probably isn't deterministic. It definitely isn't at small scales (e.g. radioactive decay). If it's non-deterministic at a macro scale, the effect is small enough that we don't see it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com