Am I a chess master?!

this thread blows

In an alternate universe, my vast multicultural background of hundreds of years experience studying patterns and concepts relating to chess (I can live up to 300 years in this universe), has enabled me to strip the game of chess down to it's core and essence. Thus, 1.e4 leads to a win for White in 67 moves, and 1.d4 leads to a win for White in 64 moves. I cannot lose, but since the challenge of the game is gone, so too I cannot win. For true enjoyment comes from the challenge to overcome, and if that obstacle is withdrawn, what is chess? A meaningless exercise of shuffling pieces until the mate is inevitable.

What a sad, horrific universe, is the one where chess has been solved.

as i said, this thread blows.

I'd be surprised if I ever found a chess website in such a universe. ;)

The principle was proven when Einstein bent light a couple degrees during an eclypse. The eclypse isn't really relevant except that it helped let the researchers see the light. But the idea is that with enough curved lenses light bends back on itself thereby seeing something that has already occured. I can't recall how it was that whole seeing the future thing worked though, but it operated on the same principle.

yes indeed.

 Too bad your intelligence only allows for short answers.

me too

Don't be so hard on yourself.

All the while, I thought we were just having fun! ;)

i'm not having fun.  i'm gouging my eyes out right now. 

Maybe it's time for one of those much vaunted "flag's forums" (post before it's locked). It has been a while and some of us are variously chaffing/champing/chomping at the bit.

I don't like it, I want variety in the universe. I'm sure there is another Earth like planet where dinosaurs still run free but the idea of a carbon copy of me out there somewhere in the far flung reaches of space???.....Poor bastard. 

They DID mention earths where the asteroid didn't hit, and dinosaurs still roamed free. 

 Don't worry, he's not guilty of reasoning, and logic, because his logic is all wrong. Deliberately not allowing something in an infinite set proves nothing because the infinite set of particals in the universe allows anything that is physically possible. Orangehonda was also wrong about me being GM Woodshover in another part of the universe because (as I said earlier) I don't think I would ever have been a GM even having been trained under the best of circumstances, just as most other people wouldn't have either. If you would have never had the ability to do something on Earth even under the best of training, there would not be another earth where you were able to do it either.

Wow, you are kind of creepy.  Just let it go.  You make up your own rules to a game, and don't listen to reasoning.  You watch a tv show, and all of a sudden you are an expert on the subject.  Come on, get real.

To show how stupid your logic is, lets look at this example.  You say it's impossible for you to become a GM.  However look at Judit Polgar.  She was trained to be a GM. Was she a GM from Nature or Nurture?  You make up your own rules, You don't understand what you say. You claim people are wrong when you have no clue. 

Sorry if this has already been brought up, but I didn't feel like looking through all of the posts.

Isn't it a bit egotistical to consider yourself the original? That there are infinite copies of you, and not that you may be just one of the copies? Perhaps you are a "less developed" (if you will) copy of a godlike being, or a being with the potential for godhood. In this case, it is perfectly acceptable to assume that another "you" may be a god in another universe. It doesn't mean that that copy somehow surpassed your utmost potential, but rather that you just don't live up to "your" true potential in this world's incarnation.

You're at least as guilty of those things as I am, and you're the one who needs to get a clue. In the case of Judit Polgar, I would say it was nature AND nurture.  Scads, and SCADS of young children are taught to play chess at very early age, and never come close to becoming GMs even when they continue to play chess into adulthood.

lol, maybe you should look at how Judit Polgar was taught. Do a little research.

If you remember, the only thing I had ever said, is just because something is infinite, that doesn't mean it contains everything.

 To poster above ^ Mathematicians disagree, I'm afraid. ^