Author: fca
Date: 14:57:07 08/16/98
Go up one level in this thread
I *know* it but can't prove it... :-) I can't find any reference in The Mathematical Intelligencer, and a friend I phoned cannot find anything in the American Journal of Mathematics, so I guess the 'proof' never made it (as is the way with most 'proofs'). I believe the author's name was Japanese, and I saw the fragment in 1994 or 1995, shown to me as part of a "wow look at this soon-to-see-the-light-of-day stuff (i.e. awaiting validation and checking)" For "is normal" (or similar), only 0.123... excepted, therefore pl read the much weaker "has passed all finite tests for normality and is considered by most mathematicians as being about as safe to assume normal as it is safe to assume that no smaller infinity than N exists and as safe to assume back in 1990 as it was then to assume that Fermat was right." ;-) I did not want to confine a retraction, however slight, to email. The point about the 16 consecutive wins - in a 'string' where occasional wins do occur - remains valid. A match has a defined starting point. In case anyone (Bruce would not) interpreted the thrust as in any way being an attack on Bruce, it certainly was not. I have seen Ferret vs GMs at blitz sometimes look like demolition derby, and it was not Ferret that was being demolished... game after game after game... "The Era of Human Domination In Chess" is over. Which does not mean the Era of Computer Domination has begun, btw... Kind regards fca
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.