Sometimes chess doesn't make sense.

Chess doesn't make sense at all like in this position:

2 pawn facing each other. Yet, they can't take each other. Are they bricks? And when pawns face to face each other diagonally they have some sort of ability to capture. 

Yet, that's not all, Knights which are horses which the piece just like a Horse having been called a knight???

In xiangqi Knights are called horses in xiangqi. It has no one to represent or ride it. So the horses can't jump over pieces. Knights in chess however doesn't have the rider and can jump over pieces unlike xiangqi.

There is also a weird thing, Rooks which are mostly designed as an Castle can still move. Can even Rooks (Castles) move??? How? I remembered they said "Rooks are auto mobiles" but if is that the case, then why we don't have auto mobiles in the 1400s and even the ancient times (Chess was originally called Chaturanga, the rooks at Chaturanga moves like the same as modern chess.)

If u can answer these questions answer it below!

All thanks to Indians, chess was created.
Here in India, we call horses as horses and not knights, and we call the rooks as elephants, and we call the bishop as a minister or a camel.
Basically, chess was created to test the strategy of the upcoming king or to refine the strategy of the existing king. We named all the 4 different pieces according to the actual military in those days. For example, the pawn is called as the soldier, and it is more in number when compared to the other pieces ( there are 2 rooks, 2 bishops, 2 knights, 1 queen and a king but there are 8 pawns ).
The game would end if the opponent's king is encircled and has no way to escape while being attacked by one of your piece or pawn. This is also what the kings would aim for in the real battle field. And rooks were not meant to look like those towers kinda shape we have today. It was meant to look like an elephant which would protect the king as well as would be used to attack or defend. And the knights were not random horses without a rider as we see in modern pieces, in the old chess set, they were used by knights ( and i guess that's where the modern name comes from as a knight is the only one capable of riding the horse and using it efficiently ) and about the queen, idk much about why the queen has combined powers of both rooks and bishops.

here is a picture of how the old set could have looked. And the soldiers ( pawns ) look like they are riding a boat but if you observe carefully, they are not riding. ( although that would be cool )

It think in the Western interpretation of the pieces the Rook was perhaps represented as a siege tower, which can move forwards and backwards easily but is bad at cornering. Although people sometimes refer to it as a castle, it looks like a single tower rather than a whole castle.

Wow

Think about a chess position from a real-life perspective. Two enemy soldiers just stand facing each other, probably kissing. They won’t do anything to kill the other unless they’re standing diagonally from the other. Weird af

LMAO!

Look at the pawns like in the movie “Troy.” When they went head to head, they were more or less equal. When Achilles face off one on one versus the opponent’s champion, he charged and attacked him at an angle to get through his defenses.

Well, depends on the region you live in, here, in my locality, we call bishops as either camel, or a minister. And we also call rooks as Elephants, and we call knights as horse. I apologize for not mentioning it, but you should clearly not refer wrong websites or sources, they ruin your knowledge you know

If u are racist to knights and "horseman". The horseman cant walk an L shape all the time. For example:

U can see the moved black knight cant move over the pawn because the pawn is blocking its way. However if u buff that knight to move like the knight in chess today, it will totally move over than pawn. Or "chot" in vietnamese.

I dont think pulling out these 2 to compare it and say xiangqi meaning still matches the same as chess and calling me young and pull out a literall chinese dictionary as if it was your class.

Knights in chaturanga can move normally like modern chess -_-

I dont believe in novels about Ben Hur.

Im arent even a fan on this makup chess styles to fit with the emporors. If it was an ancient person who was recieving de4th threats from Roman Empire that he should imply the rules and make chess that fits Augustus. But overall, these styles still perfectly follows the today chess. But it is sad to see people who were forced to make a patriotism style on these emporors and leaders, and it isn't suprising to me

Roses are red

Violets are blue

Air asked about Wing Chun

And u magically went blue

The only thing i asked and mentioned xiangqi and Chess. While none of those u say, ur telling me air asked you about Lacrosse?

Nothing is impossible. Its just about impossible's imaginary minds

Still after all nothing is impossible. And even you wont imagine if u didnt watch the video. And even im wrong the imaginative is limitless. That is why we got mobile stuff. If mobile stuff seems impossible but they can do it with complex math. Maths is also apart of limitless imaginary.

U want...?

Sure. I can spend 1 hour full cover of music named "Imaginary"but scared of copyrights.

Here:

Electric mobile cars.

Algorithms that can make choices for our life with 100% accuracy

Algorithms that will listen to us.

Killing cancer with complex medicine calculation.

Dengue fever became a minor threats to robots.

International robot-human alliance.

Nuclear energy.

Quantum machenics.

An endless loop that teleport us around the space???

Resources that could be replaced with recycle rescources.

I cant imagine all of them all of them is used. But galaxy is infinite and we havent even explored over 1% of the space. Which shows that 99% of the space is not explored. But even we can, the 99% will stuck there as it is infinite.

Edit: Time travel???

Recovering deaths?

Ending diseases?

AI teacher????

Not even it takes 0.1% brain to recieve this infomation but also very creative. Even if it compares the scale of space, it just even gonna be 0.1% scale to the endless void.

Still if the creators and chess grandmasters say it is a strategic game, shouldnt the anthropomorphising has been thought of ?