Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: more examples for search-based stupidity

Author: Robert Hyatt

Date: 11:56:34 06/15/98

Go up one level in this thread


On June 15, 1998 at 14:49:22, Hristo wrote:

>>book, which will show you that mass and energy are *identical*.  Hence
>>the famous E=MC^2 formulation by you-know-who.
>
>Bob,
>this formula is just a simplistic overview of the real formula(which I can not
>recall at the moment). While this formula shows the idea it is not exactly
>"accurate"(it is so tough to talk about physics with normal language). Your
>point would have been expressed better if you used the corellation between the
>two formulas. ahhh .. what the heck was it ?! :)) It had to do something with
>m0(mass at rest) ....
>
>Hristo


It doesn't really matter, because I don't believe in the concept as it applies
to chess anyway.  I have seen a queen-sacrifice called just that, when, in
reality, it wasn't a sacrifice at all, it was a simple combination that led to
a forced mate or a win of material.  So I don't belive "positional sacrifices"
exist, technically.  Either they are sound because there will be long-range
tactics that return the material plus advantage, or they are unsound because
the long-range tactics prove that the material can be held without losing.

same song, second verse...  positional moves are simply moves that feel right
because we can't search them deeply enough to prove that they are right.  But
many of what 100 years ago would be called positional sacrifices can now be
shown to be nothing more than simple (but deep) tactics...



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.