True or false? Chess will never be solved! why? - Chess Forums - Page 51

Jion_Wansu

Sep 17, 2014

0

#1001

chessmstrmate wrote:

Jion_Wansu wrote:

watcha wrote:

Tapani wrote:

No, since stockfish only works with evaluations (win probabilities of some sort). A solution would be "moves e4, e4, c4, Nf3, g3 draws, other moves lose". Or when asked to demonstrate a win, it would show how to forcefully acheive a position that is heuristically deemed as a win (like a rook up in a quiet position).

It just occured to me that a quiet position with a rook up can be a draw, so if Stockfish knows all too well that it is a win, then Stockfish is wrong.

Stockfish actually happens to think it is a win:

This shows that heuristics can always leak.

Even if I accept that there are unshakable heuristics, these can not reduce the search space in a significant enough way.

This is a draw

There is a Rook Sac!

Where is the rook sac? Black can just move king all day long and depending on whose time is lower, loses...

Jion_Wansu

Sep 17, 2014

0

#1002

chessmstrmate wrote:

Jion_Wansu wrote:

watcha wrote:

Tapani wrote:

No, since stockfish only works with evaluations (win probabilities of some sort). A solution would be "moves e4, e4, c4, Nf3, g3 draws, other moves lose". Or when asked to demonstrate a win, it would show how to forcefully acheive a position that is heuristically deemed as a win (like a rook up in a quiet position).

It just occured to me that a quiet position with a rook up can be a draw, so if Stockfish knows all too well that it is a win, then Stockfish is wrong.

Stockfish actually happens to think it is a win:

This shows that heuristics can always leak.

Even if I accept that there are unshakable heuristics, these can not reduce the search space in a significant enough way.

This is a draw

There is a Rook Sac!

It's a draw because after 50 moves without a pawn move, it's a draw...

SaxonViolence

Sep 17, 2014

0

#1003

In Theory, Chess has a Finite number of Games and each and every one could be worked through to its inevitable conclusion.

{Assuming that both players legitimately try to Win and don't go through endless permutations simply to boost the number of possible games...}

However, even if you built a Computer that was as big as the Universe itself and set it to exhaustively play every possible game...

It wouldn't solve Chess within the lifetime of the universe itself.

I submit that is Insolveable...

For all Practical Purposes.

Saxon Violence

Doggy_Style

Sep 17, 2014

0

#1004

SaxonViolence wrote:

In Theory, Chess has a Finite number of Games and each and every one could be worked through to its inevitable conclusion.

{Assuming that both players legitimately try to Win and don't go through endless permutations simply to boost the number of possible games...}

However, even if you built a Computer that was as big as the Universe itself and set it to exhaustively play every possible game...

It wouldn't solve Chess within the lifetime of the universe itself.

I submit that is Insolveable...

For all Practical Purposes.

Saxon Violence

Ground-breaking stuff, pat yourself on the back.

SaxonViolence

Sep 17, 2014

0

#1005

Well, I find the topic interesting--but not fascinating enough to read through 57 pages of text.

I didn't think most others joining this subject in the middle will either.

If I reiterated something already said...

You have my Apology...

Saxon Violence

XSteve1980

Sep 17, 2014

0

#1006

[COMMENT DELETED]

ponz111

Sep 17, 2014

0

#1007

Kasparov is correct that the game of chess will never be "solved". But he and almost all GMs and Super GMs are also correct that the game of chess is a draw when both sides make no errors.

I will also add that many such games have already been played.

Chef-KOdAwAri

Sep 17, 2014

0

#1008

M-W-R wrote:

Moses2792796 wrote:

I heard a while ago that it is physically impossible for chess to be solved because there is not enough room in the universe to store that amount of data (ie. because there are more possibilities than the number of atoms in the universe), I was somewhat skeptical of this idea but I would like to hear other's opinions on it.

Having said that I would not be at all surpised if many of the major variations are completely solved within 50 years.

Yeah, according to the Law of Conservation of matter, there are a finite amount of atoms, but amount of chess moves and position...endless.

Your both only considering 4 dimesions in that answer. There are at least 7 more dimesions beyond 4th's 'Time' and an infinite amount of universes.. we just dont have the means to access them....at this point.. in time.

Chef-KOdAwAri

Sep 17, 2014

0

#1009

Lenudan wrote:

M-W-R wrote:

Moses2792796 wrote:

I heard a while ago that it is physically impossible for chess to be solved because there is not enough room in the universe to store that amount of data (ie. because there are more possibilities than the number of atoms in the universe), I was somewhat skeptical of this idea but I would like to hear other's opinions on it.

Having said that I would not be at all surpised if many of the major variations are completely solved within 50 years.

Yeah, according to the Law of Conservation of matter, there are a finite amount of atoms, but amount of chess moves and position...endless.

Your both only considering 4 dimesions in that answer. There are at least 7 more dimesions beyond 4th's 'Time' and an infinite amount of universes.. we just dont have the means to access them....at this point.. in time.

to understand my comment, here's a great TED talk that touches on M, String theory and the multiverse..

http://blog.ted.com/2013/07/18/envision-the-world-in-11-dimensions-a-ted-ed-lesson-to-blow-your-3d-mind/

watcha

Sep 18, 2014

0

#1010

Kasparov is incorrect that the game of chess will never be solved.

It will either be solved or not. It is possible to solve it therefore it is impossible to know for certain that it will not be solved.

ps.

The number of legal positions of chess is less than the number of water molecules in Earth's oceans. This is a huge number, but not one of cosmic proportions.

Iluvsmetuna

Sep 18, 2014

0

#1011

I think a young girl could solve chess easily. The guys are too bogged down with existing knowledge.

watcha

Sep 18, 2014

0

#1012

Erik-the-Viking wrote:

The guys are too bogged down with existing knowledge.

Some of them are bogged down by the lack of knowledge.

Iluvsmetuna

Sep 18, 2014

0

#1013

Creativity is what's needed, innocence of mind, sudden outbursts of incomprehensibility. They may be the only hope, the girls.

watcha

Sep 18, 2014

0

#1014

Augusta Ada King, Countess of Lovelace, now commonly known as Ada Lovelace, first programmer in the world, please raise from the dead and help us solve chess!

Iluvsmetuna

Sep 18, 2014

0

#1015

Wow! She looks smart!

watcha

Sep 18, 2014

0

#1016

Not to speak of the machine which she helped come true:

Wiki: Babbage Machine

( http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Babbage_machine )

The Babbage Machine is a machine that grows babbages and uses them to perform calculations and execute computer programs. Babbages are a type of vegetable that is like a cabbage with a baby's face on it.

a babbage:

Babbages are known for being mind-bendingly cute, and babbling incoherently. A Babbage Machine works by growing babbages and then keeping a pool of babbages. Then, a program is fed to the babbages on punched cards. The babbages eat the punched cards and begin to babble. When one stands next to the Babbage Machine with one's head tilted at the correct angle, the sound of the babbling babbages coalesces to form the sound of the result of the computation, in the voice of James Earl Jones.

watcha

Sep 18, 2014

0

#1017

If anyone is telling you that a Babbage Machine looks like this, don't believe them, they try to make a fool of you:

awesomechess1729

Sep 18, 2014

0

#1018

watcha wrote:

Augusta Ada King, Countess of Lovelace, now commonly known as Ada Lovelace, first programmer in the world, please raise from the dead and help us solve chess!

Ada Lovelace was also the daughter of Lord Byron, and he could come back from the dead and help us solve the mysteries of life.

Iluvsmetuna

Sep 18, 2014

0

#1019

Legend has it that if you feed grasshoppers to Babbages, they become the ultimate learning machine, mastering all philosophies and even inventing new ones. The average cabbage does not evolve by chewing greenfly.

TurboFish

Sep 18, 2014

0

#1020

One could argue that the biological growth of a cabbage plant is equivalent to a computation (execution of DNA code).

Furthermore, researchers report evidence that quantum effects help the process of biological photosynthesis to find near-optimal paths for conversion of photon energy into chemical energy.

Thus we might reasonably classify a live cabbage as a quantum computer. Cabbage Machines and Babbage Machines are just different varieties of computers. But can a Cabbage Machine ever be a universal computer?