Author: stuart taylor
Date: 04:14:29 12/15/00
Go up one level in this thread
On December 14, 2000 at 15:05:22, Dann Corbit wrote: >On December 14, 2000 at 13:58:38, stuart taylor wrote: >>On December 14, 2000 at 11:51:42, Dann Corbit wrote: >>>On December 14, 2000 at 04:18:18, stuart taylor wrote: >>>[snip] >>>>Both ssdf (until recently when they took off 100 from everything)and selective >>>>search (england) calculate based on ELO calculations, and they go up much >>>>quicker than normal human ratings using the same system of calculation. And I >>>>think that, perhaps, in this way, computer will need to reach about 3200 elo in >>>>order to become world champion of humans. >>> >>> >>>Actually, the maximum number can be anything you want it to be, as long as the >>>entire pool gets the same absolute difference subtracted. In the ELO system, >>>the difference between players is all that matters. >>> >>>>Dan, you seem to be quite a mathematician. Though I am a bit interested in deep >>>>mathematical observations. I also think I have a beneficial lottery formula >>>>worked out. (I don't want to reveal it to the public yet, but I still would like >>>>to check it out with a super great mathematician). >>> >>>My degree is in numerical analysis, but I'm not a great mathematician. >>> >>>The lottery is for knuckleheads. The value of a ticket is far less than what >>>you pay for it. How do you think they [the lottery runners] make boatloads of >>>money? It is due to the fact that they are selling a product worth one quarter >>>for one dollar. The more tickets you buy, the dumber you are. I think that the >>>mapping is a one-to-one and onto monotonic increasing function. >>>;-) >> >>Does numerical analysis involve understanding faculties etc. and all things to >>do with the nature of numbers? > >No. Just with how to solve number problems on a computer. I don't think that >there is any discipline that has all things to do with the nature of numbers >encompassed. > >> I think that my plan achieves a greater possibility of winning vs. random >>number selection (when playing). But you need to fill quite a few cards to cover >>the whole spectrum and complete my plan. But my prediction is atleast one top >>jackpot in 25 weeks, and much besides. If so, it would pay off. >> By the way, I don't understand much numerical terminology. > >Your plan will either fail or have a return of 25 cents per dollar invested. >I'd say good luck, but I don't believe in it. >;-) > >Since we are now off-topic, if you wish to continue the discussion, it would be >better to take it to email. I might like to do that next week. Thanks, S.Taylor
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.