Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: New crap statement ? Perpetuum mobile

Author: Robert Hyatt

Date: 07:01:11 09/29/01

Go up one level in this thread


On September 28, 2001 at 00:00:43, Miguel A. Ballicora wrote:

>On September 27, 2001 at 18:06:34, Olaf Jenkner wrote:
>
>>>If you can consistently produce a speedup of 3.0, then I can time-
>>>slice that same algorithm on one cpu and get a speedup of 1.5.  And I can do it
>>>for _any_ alpha/beta algorithm you do in parallel.  Every time. And using your
>>>code, it will be easy for me to do it.
>>>
>>It's a good explanation. Some people seem to believe to perpetuum mobiles.
>
>Some believe that objects heavier than air will never fly.
>Everybody knows, that's against physics.
>
>Regards,
>Miguel


I think you worded that wrong.  Airplanes are heavier than air and have been
flying for 100 years now.  I think you meant the bumble-bee, because no one
believed they could move their wings rapidly enough to produce the lift required
to get them off the ground.

There is a difference between "believed to be impossible" and "known to be
impossible."

super-linear speedups are provably impossible.  I've already given the simple
proof.



>
>
>>
>>OJe



This page took 0.05 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.