Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Lies.. Damn Lies & Statistics!

Author: Dann Corbit

Date: 17:57:24 01/12/05

Go up one level in this thread


On January 12, 2005 at 20:55:04, chandler yergin wrote:

>On January 12, 2005 at 20:45:47, Dann Corbit wrote:
>
>>On January 12, 2005 at 20:32:35, chandler yergin wrote:
>>
>>>On January 12, 2005 at 20:30:56, Dann Corbit wrote:
>>>
>>>>On January 12, 2005 at 20:26:56, chandler yergin wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On January 12, 2005 at 20:19:48, Dann Corbit wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On January 12, 2005 at 20:04:27, chandler yergin wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On January 12, 2005 at 19:56:25, Dann Corbit wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>On January 12, 2005 at 19:37:29, Steve Maughan wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Dann,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Things that seem impossible quickly become possible.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>I recon about 300 years before a computer will solve chess.  This assumes
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>1) 10^120 possible positions
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>This is far, far too large.  Chess positions have been encoded in 162 bits,
>>>>>>>>which puts an absolute upper limit at 10^58 (and it is probably much less than
>>>>>>>>that).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>2) Alpha-beta cutting this down to 10^60 sensible positions
>>>>>
>>>>>The Question does NOT concern "sensible" positions.. It concerns ALL Possible
>>>>>positions!
>>>>>What don't you understand?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>The incorrect first assumption renders this and all following assumtions as
>>>>>>>>moot.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>It's NOT an "assumption!"
>>>>>>>THAT, is YOUR error!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>YOUR Ass-umptions that follow are ludicrouos!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Not only is it demonstrably and obviously incorrect, the proper result is well
>>>>>>known and has been known for decades.
>>>>>
>>>>>CRAP!  Stop your biased Opinion and REFUTE my Statement!
>>>>
>>>>I have already done it.  You simply don't understand it.
>>>>
>>>>> Furthermore, no advanced mathematics are
>>>>>>needed to grasp it.  A simple junior high level understanding should be
>>>>>>sufficient.
>>>>>
>>>>>Yeah.. well PROVE IT!
>>>>
>>>>Already done
>>>>Q.E.D.
>>>
>>>
>>>You'd like to think so...
>>>NOT SO!
>>
>>I will explain it so that you will very easily understand.  Consider the game of
>>tic-tac-toe.
>>
>>There are 255,168 TTT games, and yet (modulo symmetries) there are only 765
>>possible achievable positions.
>>
>>If (for each of those positions) I know what move I should make (any best move
>>will do) then I have solved the game.  With a table of the 765 answers, whatever
>>move you make, I will make my answer move.
>>
>>See:
>>http://www.btinternet.com/~se16/hgb/tictactoe.htm
>>
>>Hence, the number of possible chess games is totally irrelevant.  The only thing
>>that matters is the number of possible chess positions.  Once I have computed my
>>oracle, I will know what to do no matter what the board looks like.
>>
>>It does not matter how many ways there are to achieve a position.  I only have
>>to know what to do once I get there.
>>
>>[Event "Edited game"]
>>[Site "DCORBIT64"]
>>[Date "2005.01.12"]
>>[Round "-"]
>>[White "-"]
>>[Black "-"]
>>[Result "*"]
>>
>>1. Nc3 Nc6 2. Nb1 Nb8 3. Nc3 Nc6 4. Nb1 Nb8 5. Nc3 Nc6 6. Nb1 Nb8 7. Nc3
>>Nc6 8. e3 e6
>>*
>>
>>[Event "Edited game"]
>>[Site "DCORBIT64"]
>>[Date "2005.01.12"]
>>[Round "-"]
>>[White "-"]
>>[Black "-"]
>>[Result "*"]
>>
>>1. Nc3 Nc6 2. e3 e6
>>*
>
>You Dare comparing CHESS to Tic tac Toe? Or a LINE?

I thought if I tried a simpler model you would understand it.  Obviously, I gave
you WAY too much credit.

>To Prove an Idiotic assumption?
>The Last resort of a Knave...
>Give it UP!
>you are Lost in Fantasy... and wishful thinking!

The games are the same.  Both are finite, zero sum games.  Chess is just a bit
deeper.

About the same step apart as chess to go.

But Go will also be solved.



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.