Author: Roy Eassa
Date: 11:12:00 07/27/01
Go up one level in this thread
That was a great analogy! "If you are ill, see a physicist instead of a doctor, since the body is 100% atoms." The fact (which I agree with) that chess is 100% tactics is, in the real world, not the deciding issue in this argument, since the best humans and the fastest computers can see only a tiny bit of those tactics in many positions. Thus strategy / positional factors are critical in supplementing tactics for any positions in which there is no tactical "win" within the look-ahead (and these positions occur in essentially EVERY game that follows current opening theory). Should the fields of medicine, biology, and even chemistry disappear as a result of the fact that physics is the science that describes the underlying components (atoms and then subatomic particles)? No, because in reality we'll never have the ability to reduce all medical issues to physics, just as we cannot reduce all chess positions to tactics, due to the unimaginably high numbers involved. (I believe there are more possible chess positions than there are atoms in the universe!)
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.