Newsgroups: rec.games.chess.analysis,rec.games.chess.computer,comp.ai,comp.ai.philosophy
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!udel!news.mathworks.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!everest
From: everest@netcom.com (Wlodzimierz Holsztynski)
Subject: Re: Article on Kasparov vs Deep Blue
Message-ID: <everestDpqCqr.IBo@netcom.com>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
References: <4j6n67$nhq@news.lth.se> <4k983n$9k5@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 03:37:39 GMT
Lines: 26
Sender: everest@netcom.netcom.com
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.ai:38192 comp.ai.philosophy:39962

In article <4k983n$9k5@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, TTurgut <tturgut@aol.com> wrote:

>Chess is a game of mathematics.

	And tic-tac-toe is too.

	What a nonsensensical statement.
	Not worthy of any philosopher.

>In the initial position, even though huge,
>the possibilities are not infinite. A computer, that can calculate much
>faster ( ie 10 to the power 100 etc) will be able to give the result (
>draw) in last than 1 seconds in the future... 

	Possibly there is no future.

	Chess indeed is within the physical range of computers
	it seems today, who knows. But larger FINITE games
	may be easily beyond the range of any future computer.

	Any physicist or philosopher should easily understand
	such a simple and known concept.


		Wlod

