Will a computer ever be able to beat all humans?

Non sequitur much. What relevance does any of this have to what I said?

There's a key difference, and if you don't get it, as Rensch says, 'that's a you problem'.

Nice description of todays theories of the origins of the universe, it just shows how little we actually know

Fingerly, the one who has more faith than the other wins. It's a law of chess, whoever this person is, a Muslim, a Jew, a Hindou, a nonbeliever, or a Christian like me. This is also true concerning chess programmers. This is why I like this game and use it to constantly control myself. I think we can't know why some chess games can concern God, as we can't know, for example, all thoughts of a neighbor or someone else. But the wish to win all the time really doesn't concern God, this is a human will, and this is harmful for any chess player .

A very advanced believer able to make wonders has no need to write chess programs. He has many other things to do. Still, a situation when such person is forced to play chess against a strong PC, even if he only knows how to make moves, seems to be possible. I hope that he would bring scepticists to shame.

And look finally at what has been prompted by God. I posted it as a puzzle, only to prove that He may help everyone even in chess, and against a computer too. But do not use God's help to win all games that you play, He doesn't like it!

i wasnt reading the whole thread, i just realized people are sugesting god can help u win a chess game if u pray with faith hahaha really? are u serious? then carlsen must pray a lot and God must like him more than the other praying players hahaha

That was a beautiful sentiment. These days I'm realizing how much technology can give or takeaway from the human experience. Your example of an engine's complete lack of emotion is perfect. Why do we play chess? Surely not just to become the top champion. It's that journey and what we can learn from other people or books written by people, not engines. Technology should be a helpful resource, not an absolute reliance. The human experience is so much more valuable than technology will ever be. I'm biased because I don't study the sciences. But we can see this disconnect between the sciences and humanities. We can't survive without each other. We need to work together, not as separates.

Whoa, I went off the topic. To answer the thread's question, yes I'm sure an engine will be created that cannot be defeated in chess. These past decades show an exponential growth in the sciences. 

Would you mind explaining that comparison you made between Carlsen and Fischer? I didn't quite understand those individual statements nor their relation to each other. Thanks :) I'm truly interested in your thoughts about that.

wtf_BobbyF, what you told about Carlsen was not so fantastic that it could seem. Ivan Poddubny, the greatest wrestler of the whole world in early XXth, was a true Christian. He took a single defeat in his long carrier, and only when his opponent was cheating. Emelyanenko, a wrestler of our days, also prayed before every fighting, and was unbeatable during several years. The fact that he finally lost three consecutive fights tells only that he could make some mistakes that believers are common to call sins, and that he could pray poorly, too.

My my my, but aren't we getting so far away from the original thread? But this happens all the time, children, so there's no need to throw your toys across the room in a fit of petualance. Let's return to the OP's question:

Computers can already defeat the best humans on earth. Even Magnus Carlsen--the newest priest of Caissa (or should I say Caissa's newest Pope)--uses computers to prepare and freely admits that he can't beat them.

Computers "think" about one thing: chess. They never get sick, tired, distracted, bored, or frustrated. They never have to go to the bathroom or phone their wife that the game is lasting longer than it should and dinner will be a little delayed. Computers have every single variation of every single opening built right into them, and they never forget even the slightest deviation.

I could go on and on, but what's the point? They've got us nailed.

BUT SO WHAT???

Forklifts are stronger than the best weightlifters. Race cars are faster than the best sprinters. They haven't stopped us from striving to lift more and run faster. The superiority of computers in chess says less about the "stupidity" of chessplayers than it does about the brilliance of programmers.

And as to whether computers will one day be "smarter" than we? Well, I'm 61, and every single thing that I was told in childhood COULDN'T happen has already happened. Plus a lot more. Get ready for the future.

Kasparov could only beat deep blue once and he is the 13th Grandmaster. His rating was 2500.Now computers are way more advanced and we have Kramik which is FIDE 2800. All this happened in 20 years. According to my calculations, computers will beat humans without really trying then.   

I, as a non-believer, have absolutely no faith.

Yet, I won a few games, and I can't believe everyone I have beaten was also an atheist.

You might as well keep the religion out of this debate. I don't think Anand reached the WC title by ascetism and meditation, but rather by studying games.

Back to the point : as Scott said, the consciousness will not just appear like that. You can implement "learning" strategies to a computer, but this will still be learning restricted to the domain you asked the computer to learn. A hoover can be programmed to detect obstacles, find the shortest path to clean the house, etc. but he will simply not start hacking the internet.

As for chess, it's already over.

Clearly we can do some things computers cannot, and vice versa.  I do not see the computer as synonymous with the human brain.

God sounds like a cheating hacker. He is going to disconnect me, or force me to touch move the wrong piece.

Can I put him on my "block" list? I only want to play opponents with honor.

Now back to the topic at hand:

I"m sure that they will be able to. The processing power of computers is increasing exponentially whereas we are progressing, slowly. IF they cannot already -- I am not informed enough on the subject to veritably say yes or no -- then they for sure will be able to pretty soon. 

Yeah, my computer armed with Rybka can almost beat me now. It still misses 20 move tactics sometimes, though. Patzer.

Ubik, if you block God, you'll die immediately. Fortunately, He is all-mighty, and He doesn't give you the first possibility (though the second one always threats us). He thinks about you and directs your mind even if you don't believe it. Finally, you can feel that He exists and helps you exactly as you feel pleasure or headache.

Sorry to let you feel some headache, as talkings about God often sound bad in Occident. Occidental preachers often feel the subject of their suggestions poorly and make people only to dislike God.

For concluning my suggestions, I think that, though computers are, in fact, already able to beat any human, there is still no human chess player able to beat any computer. But this doesn't mean that such player hasn't to be ever born. This is by this way that te question of the topic must be answered, in my opinion.

What's all this crap about god?  How many pages has this been going on?