Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 14:57:06 12/23/00
Go up one level in this thread
On December 23, 2000 at 14:10:01, Tania Devora wrote: >On December 23, 2000 at 12:44:52, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On December 23, 2000 at 12:25:18, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On December 23, 2000 at 09:01:29, Joshua Lee wrote: >>> >>>>this is over a google and even if your program could search at 5 trillion nodes >>>>per second it wouldn't solve chess in your lifetime. >>>> >>>> 64^64 is one number that comes to mind 3.9402006196394479212279040100144e+115 >>> >>>The number of leagl positions is clearly smaller than 64^64. >>> >>>I do not understand why do you think about 64^64. >>> >>>Uri >> >> >>I still think 10^120 is a reasonable estimate, because a position is not just >>made up of the pieces on the board. It _also_ includes the game history up to >>that position, because of 50 move and repetition considerations. The _same_ >>position can occur with many different game histories, and each of those >>positions would be unique as far as the game of chess goes. Thinking about it, >>10^120 might be off by a few hundred zeroes, in fact... > > > > >Anybody can write how many numbers are 10^120? I dont have idea how many is >that. Thanks. the number ten (10) followed by 120 zeroes...
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.