Re: chess
From: John Savard (jsavard_at_excxn.aNOSPAMb.cdn.invalid)
Date: 08/01/04
- Next message: Lance Lamboy: "Re: More number theory tidbits, paper?"
- Previous message: John Savard: "Re: "Widely used calculus books must be mediocre." -- Walter Rudin"
- Maybe in reply to: Tim923: "Re: chess"
- Next in thread: Sterten: "Re: chess"
- Reply: Sterten: "Re: chess"
- Reply: Tim923: "Re: chess"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 16:28:15 GMT
On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 18:01:41 GMT, Tim923 <tws0923@verizon.net> wrote, in part:
>Could there be a practical
>algorithm?
Unlikely, because there are too many possible moves in chess.
Of course, if you define 'practical' as 'being capable of being executed by a
large, powerful computer', as opposed to 'being carried out by a human player in
his head', there just might be... soon.
John Savard
http://home.ecn.ab.ca/~jsavard/index.html
- Next message: Lance Lamboy: "Re: More number theory tidbits, paper?"
- Previous message: John Savard: "Re: "Widely used calculus books must be mediocre." -- Walter Rudin"
- Maybe in reply to: Tim923: "Re: chess"
- Next in thread: Sterten: "Re: chess"
- Reply: Sterten: "Re: chess"
- Reply: Tim923: "Re: chess"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|