Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 06:47:34 05/11/01
Go up one level in this thread
On May 10, 2001 at 09:43:18, Graham Laight wrote: >On May 10, 2001 at 09:27:58, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On May 10, 2001 at 00:35:50, Uri Blass wrote: > >>>10^50 is an upper bound of the number of the legal positions(2 positions are the >>>same if the pieces are in the same places and both sides have the same right to >>>castle and the same rights to capture by the en passant rule). >>>After less than 10^50 moves the same position happens twice >>> >>>If you can mate in 10^50 moves the game contains a repetition of the same >>>position twice. >>>If you can win with repetition you have a shorter win without repetition. >>> >>>It means that the problem of finding if a position is a draw or a forced mate is >>>solvable in a finite time even without the 50 move rule >>> >>>Uri >> >> >>Actually 10^50 simply means chess will never be solved. That is getting very >>close to the number of atoms in the universe. How are you going to store that >>information? > >No need to. Franz Morsch's Saitek Kasparov Travel Champion 2100 plays a strong >game with only 2 Kb of memory. Much of that space will be needed for storing >settings + move history. Clearly, it's not storing much information about the >game tree. > >>and I am not convinced 10^50 is the right number. There are positions and there >>are positions... the history (or move path) to a position is just as important >>to its identity as is the location of each of the pieces. Because without this, >>repetitions and 50-move rule won't work at all. > >Uri's point was that if any given position is repeated, you can get to any >subsequent position more quickly by removing the moves from the previous >occasion the position occurred to the current one. > >-g How will you know they are repeated if you don't store them? :)
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.