Also, say I want to end up at -0.7 or any arbitrary negative point (will always be some “positive” multiple of -0.1) but the set of preceding terms need to start at a point and go up (+0.1 ) every other term or alternatingly after the descents) then down the next term but the slope for the descents “increases” -0.1 every other term and the upwards slope is always a flat +0.1. It basically alternates between steepingly descending going then going up a flat +0.1 to attenuate the increasingly steep drops. Would prefer the 2nd last terms subsequent slope to be a descent to the final arbitrary point selected for
Its like one of those zigzag type graphs that you see in psychophysical measurements or other experiments that try to find thresholds of sensation
Kinda feels like linear algebra or something but I probably forgot a lot. Is this kind of thing actually directly solvable or is it consistent with my theory here? Feels like it should be but i dont know enough to have any confidence either which way


Hmmm, not sure I understand what you mean. However, there are things called “saddles” in numerical methods that kinda look an optimum point, but really they’re just intersections of funky surfaces.
Thanks, super weird thoughts of mine this late in the day but already glad I threw it out there ;)