Unless quantum computing takes off properly comuter speeds will probably continue to follow Moore's Law, in which case we're hundreds of years from solving chess. And it's 'maths' not 'math'.
chess & solvency & time frame [opinion]
Sort:
Dec 24, 2014
0
#3
pullin wrote:
...
People who don't agree aren't over-estimating chess, but they're underestimating the power of computers
Or they understand the magnitude of permutations and combinations in how many chess positions/games there actually are. Solving chess means knowing which move in any position is a forced win or draw (if the idea that ultimately chess is a draw). That includes the opening position and every permutation of opening choices.
Merry Christmas
Dec 24, 2014
0
#8
chyss wrote:
Kind of funny. Math, like fish and sheep, is both singular and plural and which it is in a specific instance is based on context.
pullin threw numbers at us:
Background: chess is a highly complex game.
Stop making things up.
pullin wrote:
For all games where a checkmate is on the board in 30 moves or less I think 99% of the game is solved;
Do you realize how many positions this would be?
Just because a future computer could solve nearly all mates in 30 doesn't mean it wouldn't take 1000 years for it to compute them 1 by 1 and store the solutions.
Martin_Stahl wrote:
chyss wrote:
And it's 'maths' not 'math'.
In the US, it's math.
Strictly speaking, if maths is a contraction of mathematics, it should be written with an apostrophe "math's". Something you didn't do.
Please Sign Up to comment.
If you need help, please contact our Help and Support team.
Background: chess is a highly complex game.
Chess has a lot of variables and equations and solutions like math; however, unlike math it has a set number of variables and possible equations/ solutions. There is no machine or person strong enough to solve the game currently, because it is still too expansive.
I'm a big computer/ tech geek/ nerd. I'm not good at software/ hardware, but I love researching it and reading about and hearing about all tech things current. My dad is also a computer programmer and a strong chess player (around 2000).
Opinion:
I think with chess at its current state the way to go about solving it or think about how much has been solved is # of moves played to checkmate in different intervals.
For all games where a checkmate is on the board in 30 moves or less I think 99% of the game is solved; that is: in 30 moves there needs to be a checkmate on the board allowed by one side. This is because in the modern era the highest powered machines do not yield a checkmate until a high number of moves; but theoretically against a higher powered computer it seems possible and likely they can still falter.
In 50 moves I would say 95% of the game has been solved, 75 moves 90%, 100 moves, 66-75% etc.
I think in the next 25 years 99.9% of all 30 move and under games will be solved. 50 moves 98%, 75 moves 95%, 100 moves 90% etc.
In the next 50 years I think chess will be mostly solved because all games with a checkmate on the board in under 1000 moves will almost all be solved. Computer processing continues to get much stronger since its start in 1960, and will continue to rapidly see more and more solutions.
People who don't agree aren't over-estimating chess, but they're underestimating the power of computers