Chess and the Cartesian plane - Chess Forums - Page 2

universityofpawns

Mar 25, 2017

0

#21

Wow...I remember playing that in the mid-1980s....Don't you wish you had an Apple I though???? They are worth $200,000 now if you can find one it's a definite "Bingo"..., even and Apple II is worth $1600.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2015/06/01/rare-vintage-apple-1-computer-auction/28299275/

SonOfThunder2

Mar 26, 2017

0

#22

bbeltkyle89 wrote:

SonOfThunder2 wrote:

Several good points in your idea macer.

First, the idea of using the x-y axis is brilliant if not for two problems...1) It would take to much paper. and 2) Chess players have enough on their mind trying to plan (and win) the game, they don't need the extra stress of putting the correct formula down.

Secondly, for every move the position would either increase or decrease in your favor. So black would start at the top of the y axis and white would start at the bottom (naturally). But then comes the problem of not using a engine...someone in the top 10 would have to be at every game to place the score correctly until one side gets above the x axis and the game ends.

I think you missed the point entirely....1. He isnt suggesting changing of how we notate, hes just proposing that cartesian planes could be used in how we think about chess. 2. Even if the notation were changed, it would not mean we are writing "formulas". All it does is change the column letter to a number. For example, if as white the origin is the bottom left corner, then Nf3 would instead be N6,3...or something similar.

As for your second point...i have no idea what you are talking about...

First of all, it would be way to hard for a player to remember what formula to write down for his move...he would literally sit their for 12 seconds eliminating the wrong ones. Only new players or very young ones would ever be comfortable using this form of notation.

I think you missed the point of plotting a x-y axis while the game is in progress as to keep track of the game...it would be quite faulty since you play 3.-5 you will jump up 7 lines while playing a pawn move would drop you

bbeltkyle89

Mar 27, 2017

0

#23

SonOfThunder2 wrote:

bbeltkyle89 wrote:

SonOfThunder2 wrote:

Several good points in your idea macer.

First, the idea of using the x-y axis is brilliant if not for two problems...1) It would take to much paper. and 2) Chess players have enough on their mind trying to plan (and win) the game, they don't need the extra stress of putting the correct formula down.

Secondly, for every move the position would either increase or decrease in your favor. So black would start at the top of the y axis and white would start at the bottom (naturally). But then comes the problem of not using a engine...someone in the top 10 would have to be at every game to place the score correctly until one side gets above the x axis and the game ends.

I think you missed the point entirely....1. He isnt suggesting changing of how we notate, hes just proposing that cartesian planes could be used in how we think about chess. 2. Even if the notation were changed, it would not mean we are writing "formulas". All it does is change the column letter to a number. For example, if as white the origin is the bottom left corner, then Nf3 would instead be N6,3...or something similar.

As for your second point...i have no idea what you are talking about...

First of all, it would be way to hard for a player to remember what formula to write down for his move...he would literally sit their for 12 seconds eliminating the wrong ones. Only new players or very young ones would ever be comfortable using this form of notation.

I think you missed the point of plotting a x-y axis while the game is in progress as to keep track of the game...it would be quite faulty since you play 3.-5 you will jump up 7 lines while playing a pawn move would drop you

1. 5,4 5,6 2. 4,4 4,5 3. 5,5 3,5 4. 3,3 N3,6

I just notated 8 moves in like 20 sec. I think you are overthinking it...notating in this form does not require a "formula". Its simply changing an Alpha-numeric (Letter, Number) grid to a Cartesian coordinate grid (Number, Number).

The use of formulas is just for understanding the squares that pieces cover. for example a bishop might be modeled with y=x+n or y=-x+n...meaning that for example, whites queens bishop on starting square "3,1" can cover 4,2 5,3 6,4 7,5 and 8,6 as well as 2,2 and 1,3.

This method might work for some, but not others. The value of it lies with the fact that letters dont have a mathematical value, and so their order is only determined as generally accepted.

SamTheScienceGuy

Mar 27, 2017

0

#24

bbeltkyle89 wrote:

SonOfThunder2 wrote:

bbeltkyle89 wrote:

SonOfThunder2 wrote:

Several good points in your idea macer.

First, the idea of using the x-y axis is brilliant if not for two problems...1) It would take to much paper. and 2) Chess players have enough on their mind trying to plan (and win) the game, they don't need the extra stress of putting the correct formula down.

Secondly, for every move the position would either increase or decrease in your favor. So black would start at the top of the y axis and white would start at the bottom (naturally). But then comes the problem of not using a engine...someone in the top 10 would have to be at every game to place the score correctly until one side gets above the x axis and the game ends.

I think you missed the point entirely....1. He isnt suggesting changing of how we notate, hes just proposing that cartesian planes could be used in how we think about chess. 2. Even if the notation were changed, it would not mean we are writing "formulas". All it does is change the column letter to a number. For example, if as white the origin is the bottom left corner, then Nf3 would instead be N6,3...or something similar.

As for your second point...i have no idea what you are talking about...

First of all, it would be way to hard for a player to remember what formula to write down for his move...he would literally sit their for 12 seconds eliminating the wrong ones. Only new players or very young ones would ever be comfortable using this form of notation.

I think you missed the point of plotting a x-y axis while the game is in progress as to keep track of the game...it would be quite faulty since you play 3.-5 you will jump up 7 lines while playing a pawn move would drop you

1. 5,4 5,6 2. 4,4 4,5 3. 5,5 3,5 4. 3,3 N3,6

I just notated 8 moves in like 20 sec. I think you are overthinking it...notating in this form does not require a "formula". Its simply changing an Alpha-numeric (Letter, Number) grid to a Cartesian coordinate grid (Number, Number).

The use of formulas is just for understanding the squares that pieces cover. for example a bishop might be modeled with y=x+n or y=-x+n...meaning that for example, whites queens bishop on starting square "3,1" can cover 4,2 5,3 6,4 7,5 and 8,6 as well as 2,2 and 1,3.

This method might work for some, but not others. The value of it lies with the fact that letters dont have a mathematical value, and so their order is only determined as generally accepted.

If you want to play devil's advocate, you could argue that numbers don't have an actual mathematical value but have value only as long as everyone agrees that 1 means, well, 1, and 2 means 2, and so on and so forth.

ArgoNavis

Mar 27, 2017

0

#25

And it's all Peano's fault.

SonOfThunder2

Mar 27, 2017

0

#26

bbeltkyle89 wrote:

SonOfThunder2 wrote:

bbeltkyle89 wrote:

SonOfThunder2 wrote:

Several good points in your idea macer.

First, the idea of using the x-y axis is brilliant if not for two problems...1) It would take to much paper. and 2) Chess players have enough on their mind trying to plan (and win) the game, they don't need the extra stress of putting the correct formula down.

Secondly, for every move the position would either increase or decrease in your favor. So black would start at the top of the y axis and white would start at the bottom (naturally). But then comes the problem of not using a engine...someone in the top 10 would have to be at every game to place the score correctly until one side gets above the x axis and the game ends.

I think you missed the point entirely....1. He isnt suggesting changing of how we notate, hes just proposing that cartesian planes could be used in how we think about chess. 2. Even if the notation were changed, it would not mean we are writing "formulas". All it does is change the column letter to a number. For example, if as white the origin is the bottom left corner, then Nf3 would instead be N6,3...or something similar.

As for your second point...i have no idea what you are talking about...

First of all, it would be way to hard for a player to remember what formula to write down for his move...he would literally sit their for 12 seconds eliminating the wrong ones. Only new players or very young ones would ever be comfortable using this form of notation.

I think you missed the point of plotting a x-y axis while the game is in progress as to keep track of the game...it would be quite faulty since you play 3.-5 you will jump up 7 lines while playing a pawn move would drop you

1. 5,4 5,6 2. 4,4 4,5 3. 5,5 3,5 4. 3,3 N3,6

I just notated 8 moves in like 20 sec. I think you are overthinking it...notating in this form does not require a "formula". Its simply changing an Alpha-numeric (Letter, Number) grid to a Cartesian coordinate grid (Number, Number).

The use of formulas is just for understanding the squares that pieces cover. for example a bishop might be modeled with y=x+n or y=-x+n...meaning that for example, whites queens bishop on starting square "3,1" can cover 4,2 5,3 6,4 7,5 and 8,6 as well as 2,2 and 1,3.

This method might work for some, but not others. The value of it lies with the fact that letters dont have a mathematical value, and so their order is only determined as generally accepted.

I did miss that. Never mind then

bbeltkyle89

Mar 27, 2017

0

#27

SamTheScienceGuy wrote:

bbeltkyle89 wrote:

SonOfThunder2 wrote:

bbeltkyle89 wrote:

SonOfThunder2 wrote:

Several good points in your idea macer.

First, the idea of using the x-y axis is brilliant if not for two problems...1) It would take to much paper. and 2) Chess players have enough on their mind trying to plan (and win) the game, they don't need the extra stress of putting the correct formula down.

Secondly, for every move the position would either increase or decrease in your favor. So black would start at the top of the y axis and white would start at the bottom (naturally). But then comes the problem of not using a engine...someone in the top 10 would have to be at every game to place the score correctly until one side gets above the x axis and the game ends.

I think you missed the point entirely....1. He isnt suggesting changing of how we notate, hes just proposing that cartesian planes could be used in how we think about chess. 2. Even if the notation were changed, it would not mean we are writing "formulas". All it does is change the column letter to a number. For example, if as white the origin is the bottom left corner, then Nf3 would instead be N6,3...or something similar.

As for your second point...i have no idea what you are talking about...

First of all, it would be way to hard for a player to remember what formula to write down for his move...he would literally sit their for 12 seconds eliminating the wrong ones. Only new players or very young ones would ever be comfortable using this form of notation.

I think you missed the point of plotting a x-y axis while the game is in progress as to keep track of the game...it would be quite faulty since you play 3.-5 you will jump up 7 lines while playing a pawn move would drop you

1. 5,4 5,6 2. 4,4 4,5 3. 5,5 3,5 4. 3,3 N3,6

I just notated 8 moves in like 20 sec. I think you are overthinking it...notating in this form does not require a "formula". Its simply changing an Alpha-numeric (Letter, Number) grid to a Cartesian coordinate grid (Number, Number).

The use of formulas is just for understanding the squares that pieces cover. for example a bishop might be modeled with y=x+n or y=-x+n...meaning that for example, whites queens bishop on starting square "3,1" can cover 4,2 5,3 6,4 7,5 and 8,6 as well as 2,2 and 1,3.

This method might work for some, but not others. The value of it lies with the fact that letters dont have a mathematical value, and so their order is only determined as generally accepted.

If you want to play devil's advocate, you could argue that numbers don't have an actual mathematical value but have value only as long as everyone agrees that 1 means, well, 1, and 2 means 2, and so on and so forth.

haha, sure, but that is just language in general. any word only means what society generally takes it to mean, (haha, unless you just want to talk to yourself) so yes in that sense you are correct.

macer75

Mar 30, 2017

0

#28

Thank you to everyone who poasted in this thread for your thoughtful replies! If you liked my integration of chess and mathematics in this thread, you'll LOVE my upcoming thread "Castling and the 4th Dimension," in which I integrate chess and physics! The thread will be coming very soon, so stay tuned!

fieldsofforce

Mar 30, 2017

0

#29

macer75 wrote:

Thank you to everyone who poasted in this thread for your thoughtful replies! If you liked my integration of chess and mathematics in this thread, you'll LOVE my upcoming thread "Castling and the 4th Dimension," in which I integrate chess and physics! The thread will be coming very soon, so stay tuned!

Very much look forward to that. And, thanks very much for this posted topic

macer75

Mar 30, 2017

0

#30

fieldsofforce wrote:

macer75 wrote:

Thank you to everyone who poasted in this thread for your thoughtful replies! If you liked my integration of chess and mathematics in this thread, you'll LOVE my upcoming thread "Castling and the 4th Dimension," in which I integrate chess and physics! The thread will be coming very soon, so stay tuned!

Very much look forward to that. And, thanks very much for this posted topic

I wanted to make this available as soon as possible, and after quite a bit of work, I've finally finished it:

https://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/castling-and-the-4th-dimension

Enjoy!

VladimirHerceg91

Mar 30, 2017

0

#31

Has this been implemented yet?

coachingchess

Apr 4, 2021

0

#32

This post is missing the asymmetry of chess in Cartesian algebras which has applications in cybersecurity. It is older but very relevant in topics like mirroring moves where coordinates point out king opposite queen asymmetries that make mirroring impossible (as of the first check) and cartesian labeling shows those asymmetries most clearly.

abtin1000

Dec 12, 2023

0

#33

For those saying thqt the origin is in the middle of the board this is incoorect since the coordiantes are all positive so the origin should be at the corner of a1 the left-bottom one

abtin1000

Dec 12, 2023

0

#34

this is another brilliancy of chess we can use it to think instead of the real cartesian plane to do some trigonometric and circular functions the reason is the chessboard is kinda like a restricted cartesian plane on the first quadrant and you know thinking of a cartesian plane on a limited interval is useful for sinx and cosx and for more mathematical facts