<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>High performance computing and numerical modelling · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1412.5187/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1412.5187/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>High performance computing and numerical modelling — mentioned by privong</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12462643</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1412.5187:12462643</guid><pubDate>Fri, 09 Sep 2016 14:40:17 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; The main problem with these kind of simulations is that they&amp;#x27;re O(N^2). You can&amp;#x27;t get away with modelling each star, you have to model the interaction of each star with every other star. Summary of what&amp;#x27;s below: The type of simulations described in the article do not scale like O(N^2) but more like O(N log N). A small correction here.. The gravitational force calculation for N-body simulations are only O(N^2) if they&amp;#x27;re done using direct summation and force calculation. That&amp;#x27;s only necessary if you care about the motions of individual stars. The largest simulations I&amp;#x27;m aware of that do that…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1412.5187/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>astro-ph.GA</category></item></channel></rss>
