d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Science, Technology & Nature > How To Solve The Game Of Chess? > The Old Bible Strategy
Prev12349Next
Closed New Topic New Poll
Views: 2489Replies: 83Track Topic
Member
Posts: 90,636
Joined: Dec 31 2007
Gold: 2,489.69
#11
May 16 2018 10:07am
Quote (tonerbond @ May 16 2018 09:45am)
This nigga just keeps askin


you forgot the > to make you seem whacky and original.
Member
Posts: 9,614
Joined: Apr 23 2008
Gold: 268.15
#12
May 16 2018 12:11pm
Quote (thesnipa @ May 16 2018 05:33pm)
interesting answer. i'm american, born and raised. never left the country. my sig is filled with irony you missed.

your premise makes no sense, a statistical analysis of what works on a board would be. expanding the board without a reason isn't really accomplishing anything more than setting an unrelated and random board size or even shape. why not study what would happen on a L shaped board, or what would happen if a queen could only travel an odd number of spaces?

buddy.


Oh ok , I am sorry for my mistake.

Scientists are interested in chess in a linear fashion.
For science, a game of chess boils down to a linear sequence of moves played.

For example:
Quote
1. e4 e5 2. Cf3 Cc6 3. Fb5 Cf6 4. O-O Cxe4 5. d4 Cd6 6. Fxc6 dxc6 7. dxe5 Cf5 8. Dxd8+ Rxd8 9. Cc3 h6 10. Td1+ Re8 11. h3 Fe7 12. Ce2 Ch4 13. Cxh4 Fxh4 14. Fe3 Ff5 15. Cd4 Fh7 16. g4 Fe7 17. Rg2 h5 18. Cf5 Ff8 19. Rf3 Fg6 20. Td2 hxg4+ 21. hxg4 Th3+ 22. Rg2 Th7 23. Rg3 f6 24. Ff4 Fxf5 25. gxf5 fxe5 26. Te1 Fd6 27. Fxe5 Rd7 28. c4 c5 29. Fxd6 cxd6 30. Te6 Tah8 31. Texd6+ Rc8 32. T2d5 Th3+ 33. Rg2 Th2+ 34. Rf3 T2h3+ 35. Re4 b6 36. Tc6+ Rb8 37. Td7 Th2 38. Re3 Tf8 39. Tcc7 Txf5 40. Tb7+ Rc8 41. Tdc7+ Rd8 42. Txg7 Rc8 1-0.


That's linear.



They have a one-dimensional approach to a game that has 2 dimensions.
That's a big problem.

To be sure of having a two-dimensional approach, and not making the same mistake as them, I want to remove the boundaries of the field.
Member
Posts: 9,614
Joined: Apr 23 2008
Gold: 268.15
#13
May 16 2018 12:12pm
Member
Posts: 9,614
Joined: Apr 23 2008
Gold: 268.15
#14
May 16 2018 12:14pm
Look at Deep Fritz's calculations:



That's lineaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaar.

This post was edited by Chevaucheur on May 16 2018 12:14pm
Member
Posts: 90,636
Joined: Dec 31 2007
Gold: 2,489.69
#15
May 16 2018 12:17pm
Quote (Chevaucheur @ May 16 2018 12:11pm)
Oh ok , I am sorry for my mistake.

Scientists are interested in chess in a linear fashion.
For science, a game of chess boils down to a linear sequence of moves played.

For example:


That's linear.



They have a one-dimensional approach to a game that has 2 dimensions.
That's a big problem.

To be sure of having a two-dimensional approach, and not making the same mistake as them, I want to remove the boundaries of the field.


what specifically is linear about the way scientists study chess? being bound to a board doesn't make you linear, it makes your results relevant. with an infinite number of possibilities you cant draw any meaningful conclusions.

and what reason would you have for studying a chess game without a board?
Member
Posts: 9,614
Joined: Apr 23 2008
Gold: 268.15
#16
May 16 2018 12:25pm
Read the French topic if you want more details.
Member
Posts: 9,614
Joined: Apr 23 2008
Gold: 268.15
#17
May 16 2018 12:26pm
I want to solve chess so that people are interested in my work in the social sciences.
My work in the social sciences is revolutionary and can change the world.

It's easy to solve chess.
Trust me.

This post was edited by Chevaucheur on May 16 2018 12:27pm
Member
Posts: 64,656
Joined: Oct 25 2006
Gold: 260.11
#18
May 16 2018 12:40pm
The sequence of moves being linear doesn't really say anything about the dimensions of the board.

You need to work on your English because the way you are communicating just sounds like you don't know the meaning of any of the terms you are using.

It really keeps us from taking you seriously.


If you want the world to be interested in your work the first thing you need to do is learn to communicate effectively.
Member
Posts: 90,636
Joined: Dec 31 2007
Gold: 2,489.69
#19
May 16 2018 12:42pm
Quote (Chevaucheur @ May 16 2018 12:26pm)
I want to solve chess so that people are interested in my work in the social sciences.
My work in the social sciences is revolutionary and can change the world.

It's easy to solve chess.
Trust me.


first off, that's crazy. No one says "hey that steve jobs guy figured out smartphones, let's see what he has to say on nutrition."

second off, "solving chess". what does that even mean? and how will any of your solutions, which only apply to a board without edges, apply to a board with edges, aka "chess". you're essentially creating a new game, "infinite chess", and all of your conclusions will only apply to that.
Member
Posts: 9,614
Joined: Apr 23 2008
Gold: 268.15
#20
May 16 2018 12:46pm
Quote (thesnipa @ May 16 2018 08:42pm)
first off, that's crazy. No one says "hey that steve jobs guy figured out smartphones, let's see what he has to say on nutrition."

second off, "solving chess". what does that even mean? and how will any of your solutions, which only apply to a board without edges, apply to a board with edges, aka "chess". you're essentially creating a new game, "infinite chess", and all of your conclusions will only apply to that.


The game of chess is a matter of philosophy.

We can have two possible approaches:
  • either we have an approach in one dimension, empirical.
  • either we have a two-dimensional approach, moralist.


You should look at the link in my sig:
https://image.ibb.co/hH9oVd/intelligence_sociale.jpg

(bottom right corner)

This post was edited by Chevaucheur on May 16 2018 12:47pm
Go Back To Science, Technology & Nature Topic List
Prev12349Next
Closed New Topic New Poll

© 2003-2024 d2jsp  Contact