Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Solving Chess ... Refute this, and I might listen to ya...

Author: Uri Blass

Date: 00:33:21 01/21/05

Go up one level in this thread


On January 20, 2005 at 20:45:23, Dann Corbit wrote:

>On January 20, 2005 at 20:04:22, Louis Fagliano wrote:
>[snip]
>>Actually 10^43rd power does not shrink at all.  You started out "shrinking" by
>>throwing out idiotic moves when considering all possible chess games which is
>>something like 10^120th power.  That number can be "shrunk" by throwing out
>>idiotic games.  But 10^43rd power is the number is the number of legal positions
>>in chess, not the number of different possible games since there are an
>>inumberable ways of reaching any particular legal position by an inumberable
>>number of different move orders.  The number of legal positions can never be
>>"shrunken" because every legal position must be considered in order to solve
>>chess regardless of whether or not the moves that preceeded it in order to reach
>>that position were idiotic or masterful.
>
>10^43rd power can be shrunken by a factor of 4 through simple reflections of the
>board.  Perhaps there are additional symmetry arguments that can reduce it
>further.


Where is the proof that 10^43 is correct?

I read that Vincent claimed that it is correct but I saw no proof for it.
I do not say that it is wrong but we need a link to some proof before claiming
that it is at most 10^43

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.