Solving the game of chess • page 2/2 • General Chess Discussion • lichess.org

Another thing. We have seven man tablebases. If I know that X endgame is completely won, why do I have to essentially copy and paste (and store) the same solution over and over again. Literally petabytes of information could be eliminated with something as simple as the equivalent of an If/Then statement in Excel. As we get closer to a solution, storage space required will actually decrease not increase.

petri999

#12

I guess you are not SW engineer? No one is saving same thing again and again. each unique position is saved with information on next move/moves that lead same or better position. Also is stored how many moves it takes to win.

And no storage space would not increase. when you have the 7 piece table and you add one - say - black knight you get up to 57 positions. Same every piece added TO EVERY 7 piece position already handled . So the 7 piece table piece is tiny little fraction of the eight piece table.

I guess you are not SW engineer? No one is saving same thing again and again. each unique position is saved with information on next move/moves that lead same or better position. Also is stored how many moves it takes to win. And no storage space would not increase. when you have the 7 piece table and you add one - say - black knight you get up to 57 positions. Same every piece added TO EVERY 7 piece position already handled . So the 7 piece table piece is tiny little fraction of the eight piece table.

Twitch2week2slo

#13

When chess becomes solved all we have to do is change 1 or more pieces movement and the game starts all over again. No worries.

lurarose edited

#14

Currently, Engines & AI are far superior to humans. In my pocket is a cellphone that could destroy Magnus Carlsen, or any other GM.

As for a "hard solution" to chess... a 32 piece tablebase... We will have warp drives and teleporters before that. Star Trek technology is more possible.

The amount of processing power to solve a 32 piece tablebase is insane. If Every computer in the world and every supercomputer devoted all of their combined processing to solving chess we still couldn't solve chess. If every inch of the surface of the earth was covered in nothing but the most advanced computers working on solving chess we still couldn't solve chess.

If we had all the technology of the Federation in Star Trek we still could not solve chess...

If we had all the technology of the Federation in Star Trek, and then came across a Kardashev scale Type 3 civilization that has managed to construct a series of Matrioshka brain (Basically turning a star into a super computer...) and they did that to every single star in the Milkyway Galaxy and they were our best friends and gave us everything that they have because they think we are awesome for some reason... And this type 3 civilization tried to solve chess for us because they have nothing better to do at this point... Then they set their galaxy-sized supercomputer to solving chess... Then they let it run for 10 billion years doing nothing but trying to solve chess... It still wouldn't be 1% solved.

In short... No, we will never solve chess.

If there is a God... And God wants to prove "Hey, I exist guys..." Providing us with a 32 piece chess tablebase would be a very good way to do so without interfering with civilization too much. It would prove his infinite wisdom as there is no way even the most advanced alien civilizations in the universe are capable of scratching the surface... And at the same time it's just a game and wouldn't change anything.

Currently, Engines & AI are far superior to humans. In my pocket is a cellphone that could destroy Magnus Carlsen, or any other GM. As for a "hard solution" to chess... a 32 piece tablebase... We will have warp drives and teleporters before that. Star Trek technology is more possible. The amount of processing power to solve a 32 piece tablebase is insane. If Every computer in the world and every supercomputer devoted all of their combined processing to solving chess we still couldn't solve chess. If every inch of the surface of the earth was covered in nothing but the most advanced computers working on solving chess we still couldn't solve chess. If we had all the technology of the Federation in Star Trek we still could not solve chess... If we had all the technology of the Federation in Star Trek, and then came across a Kardashev scale Type 3 civilization that has managed to construct a series of Matrioshka brain (Basically turning a star into a super computer...) and they did that to every single star in the Milkyway Galaxy and they were our best friends and gave us everything that they have because they think we are awesome for some reason... And this type 3 civilization tried to solve chess for us because they have nothing better to do at this point... Then they set their galaxy-sized supercomputer to solving chess... Then they let it run for 10 billion years doing nothing but trying to solve chess... It still wouldn't be 1% solved. In short... No, we will never solve chess. If there is a God... And God wants to prove "Hey, I exist guys..." Providing us with a 32 piece chess tablebase would be a very good way to do so without interfering with civilization too much. It would prove his infinite wisdom as there is no way even the most advanced alien civilizations in the universe are capable of scratching the surface... And at the same time it's just a game and wouldn't change anything.

petri999

#15

#13 solving chess would not change anything. Not that it will ever happen BUT humans have out classed already by computers. after 2005 there has not been challenge mach as they are now pointless. they were that already before. And we still do play. Cars were invented and people still run. Solving chess in mere mathematical problem, one that is not worth solving

tpr edited

#16

Tic Tac Toe, Four-in-a-row, Nine men's morris, and checkers have all been solved and are played far less since.
There used to be competitions in arithmetic but these are no longer organised.
Why is chess less worth solving than Fermat's Last Theorem, The Four Color Theorem, Goldbach's Conjecture, the Twin Prime Problem, or the Riemann Hypothesis?

Tic Tac Toe, Four-in-a-row, Nine men's morris, and checkers have all been solved and are played far less since. There used to be competitions in arithmetic but these are no longer organised. Why is chess less worth solving than Fermat's Last Theorem, The Four Color Theorem, Goldbach's Conjecture, the Twin Prime Problem, or the Riemann Hypothesis?

petri999

#17

nine men morrit/four in a row have never been comptetition games but kids past time. With TTT do you mean five-in-row family of games? If so they are played even on competitivevly. Fact that it is solved means nothing as no human can remember the solution. And most played format of five-in-a row happen on paper as past time activity and I do doubt if it has gone in popularity.

And assuming that these games really are less popular it probably more to do with increased competition for past time of people. 99% of population does not know five-in-row has been solved hence cannot possibly affect how likely they are to play it

nine men morrit/four in a row have never been comptetition games but kids past time. With TTT do you mean five-in-row family of games? If so they are played even on competitivevly. Fact that it is solved means nothing as no human can remember the solution. And most played format of five-in-a row happen on paper as past time activity and I do doubt if it has gone in popularity. And assuming that these games really are less popular it probably more to do with increased competition for past time of people. 99% of population does not know five-in-row has been solved hence cannot possibly affect how likely they are to play it