That's art.
chess on an infinite plane: vickalan vs rychessmaster1
Sort:
extremely farther.
Naviary wrote:
...I refuse to use scientific notation.
I agree with your stance to not use scientific notation. Numbers get rounded when you switch to scientific notation, unless you use as many digits as there are in the number anyway. Thanks for preserving the preciseness of chess.
Also agree with Tug. That is really cool art.
captaintugwash wrote:
...Try tree (3). Yes, that's a number. It's so big, there isn't enough room in the known universe to write it down, even if every number was one Planck length in size. In fact, there isn't enough room in the universe to write down how many numbers tree (3) has.
…
I had to look this up to find what you're talking about. This Wiki article mentions it:
how can a target even be identifiable across an infinite plane ?
Not seen often: a king standing next to a chancellor. (That can't be done to a queen).
53.C(6,8)+...K(7,9)
vickalan wrote:
captaintugwash wrote:
...Try tree (3). Yes, that's a number. It's so big, there isn't enough room in the known universe to write it down, even if every number was one Planck length in size. In fact, there isn't enough room in the universe to write down how many numbers tree (3) has.
…
I had to look this up to find what you're talking about. This Wiki article mentions it:
This Numberphile vid is a lot easier to digest...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3P6DWAwwViU&t=4s
54...K(8,9)
That's not check, that's killing the pawn below vick's guard.
It's illegal to change a legal move. I'm going to pretend I didn't see that. (You're playing accurately so I assume it wasn't a playing blunder. I just wonder about your counting or keyboarding skill).
55.C(6,9)+...K(9,8)
captaintugwash wrote:
...This Numberphile vid is a lot easier to digest...
Thanks for the video. I think I'll have to watch it a few more times before I understand it. But I suspect one thing - tree(3) has no purpose except to be a big number.
I only have two move options - I think this one's better:
56.C(11,9)+...K(10,8)
I've been checked seven times in a row.
YOU GOT THIS VICK!!! find a way to escape these checks.
Thanks Nav, I'm pretty sure the battle scene will go through some big changes pretty soon.
57.C(12,9)+...K(9,7)
58...K(10,6)
10^1000 is ten googols.
Try tree (3). Yes, that's a number. It's so big, there isn't enough room in the known universe to write it down, even if every number was one Planck length in size. In fact, there isn't enough room in the universe to write down how many numbers tree (3) has.
So yeah, let's see how your programme deals with that.
The farther out I go, the more numbers the program has to render to the screen. It reaches a point where the numbers go off the screen there's so many. This is what 10^1000 looks like-
and here's what numbers going off the screen looks like-
, I could always just shrink the number size though, and increase the # of digits in each row. I refuse to use scientific notation.