Author: Thorsten Czub
Date: 04:31:42 02/20/00
Go up one level in this thread
On February 19, 2000 at 22:28:25, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >On February 19, 2000 at 18:35:43, Thorsten Czub wrote: > >>the content of the game, the HOW and why and style and all the stuff that >>cannot be valued in the 3 stages above, is the game itself. >>this is the quantum-mechanics ! >Quantum mechanics is a branch of physics. It deals with physical things. Hence >the name. life is physics. events happen in life are physical. the game of chess happens in life. its physics to. the result is a number. numbers are maths. maths is different than life. again: life is a physical thing. or ? >There are some physical things in chess, like chess pieces and chess boards. ????? anything is physical tom. what is your problem ? not only the pieces are physical. you are physical too. but you are different from numbers, or ? >But the game itself has absolutely nothing to do with physics. nonsense. anything is physics. what do you learn in school ? life is not a mechanistical event. its a quantum physical event. since the game is in life, it follows those rules too. but calling a game 1-0, 0-1 or draw has nothing to do with quantum-physical point of views, that is aristotelic logic of the 3 elements. 1-0 equals yes 0-1 equals no 1/2 equals don't know (in the case of a chess game: don't know who won). the game itself is different. you cannot define the game in these 3 stages, since you and me, and even the computer, do not know 100% which move is 1-0 and which move is 0-1 and which move would be 1/2. only computers who would be able to compute it out till the end would 100% (exactly) know: this move is right, this move is wrong or this move is draw. since nobody of us has the knowledge, not you, not me, no computer in the world, the game is not known. the moves cannot be known won/lost/draw. like life. the game ends one move. life ends one day. both are limited. and you don't know which of your decisions is right (1-0) or wrong (0-1) or changes nothing (1/2). >So please don't draw confused, esoteric links between the two. sorry tom, you are wrong (0-1) :-)) this is not esoterical. this is logical. it's science. the problem is: you don't know about it. i do not confuse about it. >Personally, I think you can get your point across just as well by using words >like "beauty" and "opinion." anything taken out of life can be substituted , right. using beauty or opinion is relative too. we all know about this. but it would be wrong to reduce life to 1-0/ 0-1/ 1/2 but in a game of chess we try too. and some materialist want to tell us: only the result counts.- what a nonsense. life counts, not the result. so the game counts. not the numbers behind. >-Tom
This page took 0.01 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.