Author: Michael Neish
Date: 07:28:38 12/17/99
Go up one level in this thread
On December 16, 1999 at 22:33:16, Albert Silver wrote: >On December 16, 1999 at 17:30:14, robert michelena wrote: > >>Most scientist who tried to replicate the >>experiments failed. Several years later, even though the overwhelming majority >>of scientists cannot replicate the cold fusion results, there are some who still >>defend the validity of those who claimed they could do so. Even though the only >>body in the solar system which can do this is the sun. That being a fact of >>science, there were still does who believed what some people said. Excuse me, this is where your analogy goes awry. You say that some scientists still believe that cold fusion is genuine, but the only place in the Solar System where it occurs is the Sun. Actually the Sun doesn't work by *cold* fusion, but by *hot* fusion: at 14 million degrees C, in fact. And there's at least one laboratory on Earth (maybe more) that can sustain hot fusion for several seconds. But then again, you shouldn't believe outrageous claims made on paper. I think we're digressing a little here. >>The same analogy holds true, with respect to computer programs. If you want to >>continue believing that a program which can beat Kasparov, or draw Karpov (Fritz >>and Shredder) can lose to non-gms on an occasional basis, while playing on their >>strongest settings, then by all means, continue to do so. >>However, like the lonely scientist who stated that the world is indeed round, >>and not square, as all those around him cried, I will continue to state what I >>consider to be a fundamental truth: non grandmasters cannot beat commercial >>programs at their strongest settings. You're strongly expressed beliefs have been convincingly put down by many people in this thread; the only way I can explain your continued insistence on ignoring the obvious is by assuming you're joking. Are you? One thing is to adopt some stance and reject everything that contradicts it (as you clearly are in this case), and a totally different thing is to adopt a stance based on some rigourous study and careful thinking which is capable of holding up against the fiercest criticism. The world may diagree with you at first, but in the end they'll come round (sort of what you're hoping we'll all do, right?). Some people claim to beat a top program occasionally. We know for a fact (because you say so) that it's impossible. Therefore they are lying. Therefore everyone who believes such liars is either very gullible, insane, stupid or deluded (that goes for me too). You're the only one who can see the light. Please cure us all and demonstrate why it's impossible for an average player to accomplish this task. Mike.
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.