1. Donationketchuplover
    Isolated Pawn
    Wisconsin USA
    Joined
    09 Dec '01
    Moves
    71174
    03 Dec '05 22:261 edit
    Solves chess. Fischer was wrong twice. The game is theoretically a win for black,and 1. Na3 is actually white's best opening move.
  2. Standard membersasuser
    Mysterious Rook Move
    Milwaukee
    Joined
    23 Dec '04
    Moves
    3265
    04 Dec '05 09:061 edit
    What about quantum computers? In theory could they have zero computing time and enough storage for the 32 man tablebases?
  3. Standard memberBowmann
    Non-Subscriber
    RHP IQ
    Joined
    17 Mar '05
    Moves
    1345
    04 Dec '05 12:56
    Originally posted by sasuser
    What about quantum computers? In theory could they have zero computing time and enough storage for the 32 man tablebases?
    Quantum computers will not be so magical.
  4. Joined
    31 Oct '05
    Moves
    1715
    04 Dec '05 19:26
    The solution is simple: a quantum computer. When these computers become a reality very few things will be outside their reach. A hypothetical 500 qubit quantum computer could perform 2^500 calculations at a time.
  5. Standard memberBowmann
    Non-Subscriber
    RHP IQ
    Joined
    17 Mar '05
    Moves
    1345
    04 Dec '05 21:07
    Originally posted by Balla88
    The solution is simple: a quantum computer. When these computers become a reality very few things will be outside their reach. A hypothetical 500 qubit quantum computer could perform 2^500 calculations at a time.
    Solving chess in perhaps just a few trillion years 😵
  6. Hinesville, GA
    Joined
    17 Aug '05
    Moves
    12481
    04 Dec '05 23:08
    Originally posted by basso
    Kasparov weighed in on this a few months ago on the Charlie Rose show. He said that humans would always be able to beat computers because computers will always lack an essential quality of good chess-playing that humans have -- intuition.
    I believe Kasparov entirely! In searching to equate the power of technology with the power of the human spirit, we will (and I feel this in my heart) discover that the human spirit has no measure. 🙂 God bless us all.
  7. Forgotten
    Joined
    15 Sep '04
    Moves
    4459
    04 Dec '05 23:191 edit
    chess is not infinite
    it IS finite but the numbers involved are so astronimical there are more move variations in a game of chess than there are atoms in the universe . it theoretically could be solved, but so far in the future that to all intents and purposes it is unsolvable when speaking in real terms.but i could be wrong . i mean im a patser
  8. Standard memberBowmann
    Non-Subscriber
    RHP IQ
    Joined
    17 Mar '05
    Moves
    1345
    04 Dec '05 23:23
    Originally posted by powershaker
    In searching to equate the power of technology with the power of the human spirit, we will (and I feel this in my heart) discover that the human spirit has no measure. 🙂 God bless us all.
    Twerp.
  9. Hinesville, GA
    Joined
    17 Aug '05
    Moves
    12481
    04 Dec '05 23:27
    Originally posted by Bowmann
    Twerp.
    Hey, give me a break! I can't help it! I'm a romantic! 🙁 LOL
  10. Joined
    31 Oct '05
    Moves
    1715
    05 Dec '05 00:38
    Originally posted by Bowmann
    Solving chess in perhaps just a few trillion years 😵
    Keep in mind that not all possible chess variations need to be calculated. As games develop the amount of "correct" (best) moves and the response to these moves decreases immensely. In the future, computers will be unbeatable for this reason. Drawing is the most humans will be able to accomplish against computers.
  11. Standard memberBowmann
    Non-Subscriber
    RHP IQ
    Joined
    17 Mar '05
    Moves
    1345
    05 Dec '05 01:02
    Originally posted by Balla88
    Keep in mind that not all possible chess variations need to be calculated. As games develop the amount of "correct" (best) moves and the response to these moves decreases immensely.
    Keep in mind that there is a large number involved to start with. And so a small percentage of it will be astronomical all the same.
  12. Joined
    31 Oct '05
    Moves
    1715
    05 Dec '05 02:51
    Originally posted by Bowmann
    Keep in mind that there is a large number involved to start with. And so a small percentage of it will be astronomical all the same.
    Again, the amount of good moves and their possible responses are not astronomical. If they were so astronomical, computers wouldn't already be as good as they were already. Some computer programs use simple brute force algorithms for their engine and they still win against all but the Grand Masters. Perhaps you don't understand how powerful quantum computers would be.
  13. Standard memberBowmann
    Non-Subscriber
    RHP IQ
    Joined
    17 Mar '05
    Moves
    1345
    05 Dec '05 03:01
    Originally posted by Balla88
    Perhaps you don't understand how powerful quantum computers would be.
    Perhaps you forgot that this thread was about solving chess, not building better machines to play it.
  14. Joined
    31 Oct '05
    Moves
    1715
    05 Dec '05 14:04
    Originally posted by Bowmann
    Perhaps you forgot that this thread was about solving chess, not building better machines to play it.
    And I'm telling you that solving chess doesn't mean finding all possible variations.
  15. Milton Keynes, UK
    Joined
    28 Jul '04
    Moves
    80197
    05 Dec '05 14:11
    Originally posted by Balla88
    And I'm telling you that solving chess doesn't mean finding all possible variations.
    What calculated to be the best move from analysis to 10 ply ahead would not necessarily be for 11 ply.

    You would have to find all possible variations to be able to know the best move every single time right to the end of the game to solve chess.
Back to Top

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.I Agree