Check out Atomic Chess, our featured variant for November, 2024.


[ Help | Earliest Comments | Latest Comments ]
[ List All Subjects of Discussion | Create New Subject of Discussion ]
[ List Earliest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]

Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

Earlier Reverse Order Later
cvts[Subject Thread] [Add Response]
Jeremy Good wrote on Mon, Dec 8, 2014 06:01 PM UTC:
My comments below might possibly be re-framed in the following way: At what point will humans alone be unable to devise a chess variant too complicated for computers to solve?

OR:

At what point will the technological singularity arrive to chess variants and how might we define that?


(zzo38) A. Black wrote on Mon, Dec 8, 2014 06:46 PM UTC:

I have actually thought of a way to define a variant too large for anyone in this universe to play (whether human, alien monsters, computer programming, or whatever) and therefore is probably impossible to solve by computer too; I have defined a googolplex kind of pieces but had some trouble to define the primitives it is made from in order to ensure all of them are different (however, I think I may have figured out the solution just now).

Perhaps that isn't what you want though. Well, the answer to your question still isn't clear. Even in games where "there aren't so many moves which are at all sound", it seems to me that you should need a mathematical proof of that statement in order to correctly take advantage of it. (Still, it may be possible to make such a mathematical proof without enumerating all of the moves; it is possible to prove a lot of things about numbers which are larger than the universe.)


Jeremy Good wrote on Wed, Dec 10, 2014 05:54 PM UTC:
Email me, plz, zzo. If you have time.

3 comments displayed

Earlier Reverse Order Later

Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.