Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 16:16:23 01/25/05
Go up one level in this thread
On January 25, 2005 at 16:57:23, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On January 25, 2005 at 16:54:55, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>On January 25, 2005 at 16:53:03, Olaf Jenkner wrote: >> >>>> >>>> >>>>but to store a 32 piece tablebase would be a lot 'smaller'. >>>> >>>>might a 2.5 by 2.5 kilometre crystal do the trick ? >>>> >>>> >>>>duncan >>> >>>We have about 10^42 positions to store. >>>The third root is 10^14. >>>Take a 1000^3 km crystal. You must store 100000 positions >>>at one millimeter. 100 at one micrometer. Maybe, the crystal was too >>>big. >>> >>>Perhaps 99,999999% of the legal positions will never be >>>necessary to compute the tree. Than we can take a smaller cube. >> >>There may also be some solution near to the origin that takes a paltry few >>sextillion operations to solve. > >Good try, but GM's would already have found that mate in 40 if it would exist. > >So it's just not there. Have a bit faith. I didn't say it was likely. ;-) Maybe it starts out crazy like 1.a4 and then tossing the a-file rook. Who wants to waste a few weeks chasing that trail?
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.