Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Advances in computer chess/science (was What about evaluation, Ed?)

Author: Alessandro Damiani

Date: 05:34:21 01/05/03

Go up one level in this thread


On January 05, 2003 at 07:39:05, Sune Fischer wrote:

>On January 05, 2003 at 07:00:41, Uri Blass wrote:
>
>
>>Nonsense.
>>
>>There is no contradiction between trying your own ideas and understanding ideas
>>of other people.
>>
>>Reading ideas of other people can give you new ideas to try
>
>If a field is very advanced it becomes harder and harder to make contributions.
>Why do you think people go to school for 9 years, then another 7 years to get an
>education? And inspite of all your knowledge, how much did you contribute to
>math or chemistry sciences?
>
>Getting new and good ideas is not easy when they have all been "taken".
>

This is wrong. History proved that: in the past classical physicians thought
they knew almost everything of physics. They *really* thought there would be
only some isolated cases that had to be explained. This was until Einstein came
and pushed the horizon of knowledge to a higher level!

The horizon is artificially made by human beings, more precisely by their
theories. Only such a horizon makes you thinking "if a field is very advanced it
becomes harder and harder to make contributions.".

We should not think like a chess engine: "there is nothing beyond the search
horizon.". There is no real horizon.

Alessandro



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.