Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 01:21:24 01/21/05
Go up one level in this thread
On January 21, 2005 at 03:33:21, Uri Blass wrote: >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 That is based upon 162 bits to encode the position. I believe that you did a counter program which came up with a different figure. Do you remember what it was?
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.