Author: Uri Blass
Date: 20:34:04 11/28/02
Go up one level in this thread
On November 28, 2002 at 23:23:19, Mike Byrne wrote: >On November 28, 2002 at 22:52:45, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On November 28, 2002 at 22:40:42, Mike Byrne wrote: >> >>>On November 28, 2002 at 22:20:02, Tanya Deborah wrote: >>> >>>>On November 28, 2002 at 22:05:39, Mike Byrne wrote: >>>> >>>>>snip >>>>>>> >>>>>>>All your answers are welcome... >>>>>>> >>>>>>>My best Regards! >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Tanya. >>>>>> >>>>>>6.5104179521361946395624758693608e+308 >>>>>> >>>>>>I know this is the exact number of chess positions, because I counted them one >>>>>>day using my Palm and Chess genius. >>>>>> >>>>>>But how do you count all the atoms in the universe? I might need a newer Palm >>>>>>for that one ...hmmmm ....yea, I could that on of those new palms. >>>>>> >>>>>>Hold on - let me go talk to my wife and explain to her why I need a new palm. >>>>>> >>>>>>THANKS - You gave me the perfect reason for a new Palm - to count all the atoms >>>>>>in the universe. >>>>>> >>>>>>eh ...Does anybody want to help? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>got the answer for atoms - it's right here >>>>> >>>>>" >>>>>It seems, then, that the number of atoms in the Universe is at least about 4e78, >>>>>but perhaps as many as 6e79. I would suggest 1e79 as a reasonable estimate. That >>>>>is, 10 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 >>>>>000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 atoms. >>>>>" >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>Thanks Mike, very nice page. But how about the total number of chess >>>>positions??? >>>> >>>> , >>>>>http://www.sunspot.noao.edu/sunspot/pr/answerbook/universe.html >>>>> >>>>>looks like "positions in chess" beats "atoms in the universe" by a fair amount >>>>>.... >>>>> >>>>>...now about the 32 man EGTB that I was thinking about - how many drives would I >>>>>need?? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>;>) >>> >>> >>>I gave you the number 6.5104179521361946395624758693608e+308 that is 6.5 x10 to >>>the 308 or just add 308 zeroes ... >>> >>>6,500,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 >> >>Your number is wrong >> >>The number of positions is clearly smaller. > >Yes you are correct -- clearly a big difference - I was counting games but after >second thought my second estimate is much close I believe. 1e154 or so. I know that the number of positions(not games) is less than 1e48 > > > >> >>You gave an estimate for the number of games >>and this number is also wrong. > >Show me. No problem The number of possible games is clearly bigger because the sides can play even 1000 moves when every side have 10 possibility not to capture,not to move a pawn and not to give checkmate. imagine that the sides always move with their knights in the first 50 moves and only in move 50 black plays 50...a7a6 they continue with 99 quiet plies and black plays 100...a6a5 If I assume that they have 10 possibility to move with the knight in every move they can continue without captures for more than 1000 plies. a7a6 a6a5 a2a3 a3a4 are 4 moves in the a file. 4*8=32 moves so the side can play 32 pawn moves and more than 98*32 quiet moves. total number of moves is more than 32+98*32=3168 moves. If in every move every side has 10 not to move with a pawn and not to capture then you can get more than 10^3000 games without captures. The number of quiet legal moves in the first ply is 4 but even if you assume 4^3000 it is clearly more than 10^1000 games. My estimate for 10 is follow from the fat that the side have more moves after they move the knights and the pawns. Uri
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.