Newsgroups: rec.games.chess.analysis,rec.games.chess.computer,comp.ai,comp.ai.philosophy
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!godot.cc.duq.edu!news.duke.edu!news.mathworks.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!sasha1
From: sasha1@netcom.com (Alexander Chislenko)
Subject: Re: Article on Kasparov vs Deep Blue
Message-ID: <sasha1DpyrBL.JJG@netcom.com>
Organization: Institute of Memetic Engineering
References: <4k983n$9k5@newsbf02.news.aol.com> <4k9i5e$cte@newsbf02.news.aol.com> <cottrill.829175897@nexus.yorku.ca> <4kj7lg$k9g@gjallar.daimi.aau.dk>
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 1996 16:33:21 GMT
Lines: 24
Sender: sasha1@netcom9.netcom.com
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.ai:38273 comp.ai.philosophy:40138

In article <4kj7lg$k9g@gjallar.daimi.aau.dk>,
Morten Lauritsen <moffe@daimi.aau.dk> wrote:
>
>If we disallow repetition, doesn't the game-tree become finite? I think so, but
>I don't care enough to try and prove it.
>

  The game apparently has a finite number of different positions.
If you are not allowed to repeat them, this number also limits the length
of your longest game. 

  As for the complete search, it may be possible to build an infinitely
fast machine based on pocket universes, or something like that.
Infinite computing speed seems to make intelligence/understanding
unnecessary in a finite world.   However, this doesn't sound very
exciting for people who are more attached to the architectural
intricacies of computational systems than to ultimate results of
their labor.


-----------------------------------------------------------
| Alexander Chislenko | sasha1@netcom.com | Cambridge, MA | 
| Home page:  http://www.lucifer.com/~sasha/home.html     |
-----------------------------------------------------------
