Re: The Future of Chess and Getting It "Unstuck"

On Apr 17, 10:18 pm, Quadibloc <jsav...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

> Godel's theorem might impinge on chess by making unavailable some
> infinite mathematical theorem that would be a simpler way to make a
> statement about chess than a calculation applying only to one finite
> form of chess. So even if it could not affect our _possible_ knowledge
> about a finite game, it could affect the knowledge that is
> _conveniently_ available about it.
>
> (sci.math pulled back in: it will take people from there to comment on
> this one!)

Chess fits under combinatorial game theory.  It is part of math.
Therefore, I can conclude that Godel's theorem applies to chess.  At
least the idea of the number of rules available to a system is
relevant to a study of axioms and logic, which is in mathematics, thus
chess would be relevant to the discussion, and the Hera****ian/
Calvinball question is appropriate.  I will say that people can debate
whether or not Godel's work applies or not, which is valid.

Anyhow, in regards to me Hera****ian/Calvinball question, I believe an
answer would be yes it can be infinite (not playable infinite, but
theoretically.  I can look to the answer in the game Gipf.  Gipf
proposes that if players want to enter a new piece into play, players
must play a different game to decide this.  One could have an infinite
number of these playing a game to determine if a rule can enter in.
In other words, recursion is another way to do this.

But, back to the original question about the future of chess, the idea
is to discuss where it may head, and how it can get there.

- Rich