I think the point being made is that there is very little room for creativity there... There are tons of examples of physics engines written in multitudes of languages with a full range of quality of implemention.
Now if the LLM had known to look for and found dark matter or gravitational waves all while sitting there on your computer comparing micro changes between CPU cycles, maybe you would have a point. To my knowledge most physics engines do the even emulate Newtonian physics nevermind more modern variants
I'm not talking about the physics calculations. I'm talking about it navigating, adapting and coding using my own patterns, coding style and structure within a context that is completely custom. It understands the framework I've built, what functions to use when and writes code looking and working as if it was my own.
> It understands the framework I've built, what functions to use when and writes code looking and working as if it was my own.
Yes, that's what LLMs do. They build statistical models based on their context and training data. They then give the most likely statistical output.
There's nothing creative about it, it's all statistics based on the inputs and they can at best extrapolate but they cannot fundamentally move outside of their inputs.
