11953 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
Don't go dragging imaginary numbers into this too. Everybody knows they're not real.
"Not Real," like the rest of the pieces on the OP's original chess board in his first post.
The OP has now largely abandoned his thread. Thankfully.
Exchanging two Rooks for a Bishop is not a math problem, it's a chess problem.
You'd think that even with a BA in math that paul would know the correct value of pi. Of course, maybe in the "system" (or language?) he is using, his value is correct.
LESS WE FORGET the M.I.T. fight song:
SIN - SIN - COSINE - SIN
3 - POINT - 1 - 4 - 1 - 5 - 9
I thought the MIT fight song went..."MIT, PHD, M-O-N-E-Y"
They must have changed it, since I heard last.
I though the MIT fight song went..."MIT, PHD, M-O-N-E-Y"
No No. You're confusing the graduate fight song with the undergraduates fight song.
The MIT undergrads are more clever, in any case. Mea culpa.
I know im coming into this late, but dividing by zero is "undefined", not infinity.
The concept that explains division in algebra is that it is the inverse of multiplication. For example,
since 2 is the value for which the unknown quantity in
is true. But the expression
requires a value to be found for the unknown quantity in
But any number multiplied by 0 is 0 and so there is no number that solves the equation(including infinity).
Therefore, dividing by zero does not give you infinity, it is undefined.
If you are going to use ratios, use the amount of material remaining on the board instead of what is captured.
I remember in 8th grade algrebra, I insisted that division by 0 was 0. Mr. Miller, it a fit of frustration, took all the change out of his pocket and dumped it on my desk. "Divide that into 0 piles!" he said.
I swept the change off my desk and put it into my pocket.
That is what happens when we try to boil down a complex situation into simple metrics. It's just a question about which one is more useful or less useful to know. They can be used when a student is learning and maybe that is the only time they should be used. It relates to politics too, since we can say the GDP was this many billion dollars vs. that many, but then there are still very many details left undetermined and unknown.
To your utmost sadness and disgust, I still lurk around this post everyday, reading your (and others') comments. And nice to see you managed to get everyone against me.
Sincerely, The OP who "largely abandoned" this topic.
I agree with your point at ?x0=6.
But look at this, 2x3=6That means, 2+2+2 (added to itself thrice) gives 6.
But here,0x?=6That means you have to keep adding 0 to itself until you get 6. Since that is impossible, it is considered "infinity". Why, have you ever thought that it is strange that in Physics, an object kept at the focus of any lens gets formed at "infinity", i.e. it is never formed. In that case, do you oppose that it shouldn't be infinity? Infinity stands for a "never-ending" number whose extent you cannot reach. Zero added to itself an infinite times gives 6 (or for that matter, any real number).
How can 5x = 7x for any x other than zero? What does this equation mean??
There are multiple infinities. That's why I pointed you in the direction of Morris Kline's book, regarding Georg Cantor's work on transfinite numbers, in post # 11. But to no avail.
And you're still stuck on exchanging "two Rooks for a Bishop" as a doorway to the mathematical universe and the secrets of chess?
So be it. Knock yourself out. More power to you.
Answer to Question #1: It can't. Many equations have a rather short list of values for x which make the equation "true". Example: for equation x(x-1) = 0, the only sol'ns are x = 0 and x = 1
Answer to Question #2 (Part 1): See answer to Question #1. That is x = 0 is the only sol'n to this equation.
Answer to Question #2 (Part 2): and I hate to have to be the one to break it to you, you are apparently "algebraicly challenged".
Excuse me, but either you have never gone to school or don't get mathemathics at all. With all respect I must say, that 0 will always be zero, even if multiplied/added infinite times. However, since "infinite" is not a number, rather a directional expression, statements with x being multiplied, added, substracted from infinity are illegal.
You may ask, why 0 infinite times is not 6, 7 or any other real number. The answer is simple:
01+02+03+04+...+0n = 0, since 0+0 = 0. therefore (0+0)*n is still zero, even as n approaches the infinity.
The expresions 1/0, 2/0 etc. have no meaning, since, as the other commentators correctly said, all numbers multiplied by zero will always give zero. If we would allow such expressions, proving that 2 * 2 = 5 would be no big deal.
Regarding the OP's first post, he has made a mistake. You should calculate piece points only by addition and substraction. You shouldn't use ratios, since these methods are not compatible with how the chess game works and are therefore invalid. You will never hear a person say: "my position is 1,67 times better than my opponent's". You usually hear: "I'm 5 points ahead of my opponent". Therefore, ratios should not be used when calculating chess problems, because it is not how a chess game works.
The problem you've stated is simple and one needs little math knowledge to solve it. If a bishop, which is accompanied by a queen takes your rook, you shouldn't retake that bishop since you will lose more points than if you had not taken it. Your first argument, concerning addition and substraction is alright.
a/0 is undefined, but the limit of a/x as x -> 0 from the right = infinity, which is what Kingpatzer said I believe. a/x is not defined as anything.
@OP: Your idea of ratios might work if you only consider the pieces left on the board.
The fallacy is that you can't divide by zero. This is not allowed by the laws of mathematics. It doesn't give the result of "infinite;" it gives you the result of "meaningless." If you allow the expression 1/0 in algebra, it is easy to prove that 1=2. So your "ratio" of 5:0 yields no fraction and is null and void.
How's that 1=2 thing work?
@StrategicPlay: What type of math are you studying right now?
When you try to solve anything that reduces to something like 4x = 20x and at some point divide out your x then you end up with a nonsensical expression like 4 = 20. But of course because x was actually 0 you weren't able to treat it as a factor.
Oh, looks like I'm late to the party lol.
What to play against the King's Indian Defense?
by AssauIt a few minutes ago
WHo is better
by Xeelfiar 3 minutes ago
Positions engines get wrong ( please contribute )
by watcha 3 minutes ago
Chess Young Gernius or not?
by shadowsaybye 6 minutes ago
Anand vs Carlsen: World Championship match thread
by shockinn 6 minutes ago
My first IM win
by TiMePaRaDoX_73 8 minutes ago
Where is logical thinking in the chess ?
by shadowsaybye 8 minutes ago
Who is better Paul Morphy or Magnus Carlsen
by messi2 10 minutes ago
12/9/2013 - Mate in 3
by wyh2013 10 minutes ago
What IM,FM or GM chessplayer has (or had) the funniest name ?
by TiMePaRaDoX_73 11 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2013 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!