Chess players are not nerds

TheGreatOogieBoogie wrote:

You mean refuting alien conspiracy theories... right?  Physics, logistics, and probabilities all point to them never coming here or ever being here.  Considering the odds of intelligent life evolving it'd be a safe bet to assume we're alone in the Milky Way or at least our section of it. 

It's funny, because those who say intelligent life exists outside of earth give the reason that the universe is so vast as evidence that it's likely other intelligent life exists. So no one really wraps their brain around that probability. Everyone just uses it as their logic for whichever side they want to believe.

The only probability that makes sense to me is that, since we will have the computing power to simulate entire worlds within 50 years, and therefore a universe is computable, then given enough time we would convert to a virtual world where we live inside of a computer. In terms of probability, it's prohibitively unlikely that we would be living at the time when this conversion first happens. Therefore it is extremely likely that we are already living inside of a computer simulation. This seems like it would jive with science and religion very well. Now imagine the programmer looking at the simulation we are in, and laughing at how we calculated the "age of the universe", and all of these other hair brained ideas like string theory and dark matter. When you think of it this way, science and religion both require equal amounts of faith.

This line doesn't do anything. You're not a real nerd.

Russian chess players are not nerds ,all the rest are nerds. If you have played more than 50 games on c.c. you are not only a nerd,you are a sad nerd without a social life but you are still better off than the bullet or blitz addicts for whom there is no hope left at all.

This only applies to males.

Any female chess player is sexy for some inexplicable reason.

I know the reason. The tits, the smile, the eyes, the hair, the legs and the brain.

Nerds are da shit.. (Did i just say that, lol)

Dunno Lou ,for me it has always been the way they play. You never know what to expect and they are almost always super aggressive plus they smell nice,and don't have beards.

Here in America class and income merely has a correlation, but where one's parents worked and where one went to school and works determines their class. George Bush is upper class because of his generational wealth, attended Andover, Yale, was a Bonesman (this part is especially key), and entered business and later politics whereas someone born poor and gets rich in acting is just a lower class guy with money.  A couple of phrases, "You can't take the ghetto out of the guy" and "Money can't buy class" apply here. 

STEM is considered socially lower than a trust fund baby philanthropist with an art or philosophy degree from Princeton.  Harvard is associated with class whereas MIT isn't despite both being most selective and elite. 

Why isn't science considered "classy"?  I personally don't know for certain, but think it may be because the information is available to anyone with the intelligence and tools to discover whereas upper class tastes can only be handed down via upbringing and initiation. 

Yes, nothing more sexy than being mated by a smart and energetic lady without a beard.

It's not a hard science like physics (we don't make the rules there whereas people made the rules to chess) but the scientific method can still be applied to it and it was Steinitz who founded the scientific approach to chess.  The Russians (special mention goes to Botvinnik) greatly added to it.  Chess requires a great deal of technique (Lasker said the hardest game to win is a won game and this is where technique comes into play) in order to be good at it. 

If a move increases the oppoent's chances of winning (or drawing if you stand better) then it's objectively incorrect, forcing mate is superior to droping pieces without compensation, a position is judged on its positional imbalances or objective qualities, calculation and methodical doubt are applied to ensure we play the candidate we think has the least probabilty of us losing/greatest of us winning, etc. 

Rapunzel plays chess in the disney movie "tangled". But who cares what other people's perception of chess players is anyway?

My wife calls me a chess nerd :)

I think sophisticated is the right word

Lou-for-you wrote:

Yes, nothing more sexy than being mated by a smart and energetic lady without a beard.

I hear you but there was that girl from the movie 'Sucker Punch' Armed with a sword fighting an 8 foot robot Samurai wielding a gatling gun. In the snow.In front of that Japanese temple.That was pretty sexy. Later she killed a dragon. Never touched a chess piece. Hard to beat that.

that is funny.....my husband calls me chess nerd too but I I dont think I look like one  LOL....oh well

Nothing. It's just a stereotype. Normal people with average IQ make that label.

Here's my equation for the "Nerd Constant" that I came up with a couple of years ago:

N = ((IQ/100)*GPA*C*V*G*A*S*M*H)/F

N = Nerd Constant

IQ = IQ, pretty self-explanatory

GPA = GPA on the 4.0 scale, unweighted

C = 1.5 if person plays chess, C = 1 if person does not

V = 1.5 if person plays video games, V = 1 if person does not

G = 1.5 if person wears glasses, G = 1 if person does not

A = 1.5 if person enjoys anime, A = 1 if person does not

S = 1.5 if person enjoys science, S = 1 if person does not

M = 1.5 if person enjoys math, M = 1 if person does not

H = 1.5 if person enjoys history, H = 1 if person does not

F = total number of close friends person has

That puts my N-value at:

(1.4*4.0*1.5*1.5*1*1*1.5*1.5*1)/5 = 5.67

I would say a person could be considered a nerd if their N-value is greater than 3.

Anyone have any ways they think I could improve the equation? More things that nerds like/do?

hahah, actually it's cool and a it seems to me a very logical equation 
but what if the person has no close friends? then the result tends to infinite? so the person is an INFINITE MAXIMUM ULTRA NERD? 

ERROR: DIVIDE BY ZERO

But in all seriousness, I don't know if it's possible for a person to have no close friends whatsoever. There's always at least one person, I know that from experience!

I coach students who are anything but nerds. For example one of my high school students who won the county high school chess championship as a freshmen curently plays Linebacker and benches 340 and looks like he could rip your face off... if you got him angry lol.

Now it's got me thinking about possibly revising the equation using base-2 logarithms in both the numerator and the denominator, and using values of 1 and 2 rather than 1 and 1.5 for the various parameters. This would result in a less ridiculous range of N-values.