Engineer
Major
A neat idea, but the authors oversimplified the concept of planetary motion. An excerpt from the paper:
May be the authors didn't have enough space to devote to history, but that very first sentence should have given everyone a clue: If the concept were so simple, humanity wouldn't have spent centuries working on it! Those centuries should be more like millennia, because observation started way back in ancient time. Here is a video about that history:
The authors trained and used a 109M parameters model that did nothing except for predicting next planetary positions based on a sequence of observation. The authors' argument would have been a little more convincing had the model output velocity of the planets as well. With only positions and no mass data given, the valid course of prediction would be through the use of N-th order polynomials, and that's exactly what the model did.
Even with knowledge on Newton's Law of Gravity, N-th order polynomials are still used to describe motion of planets in real world application, such as NASA's DE Series. Newton's Law only works for two-body systems, which the solar system is not. So may be it wasn't the model that is stupid here.
Last edited:
