**Next message:**Alejandro Dubrovsky: "Re: COMP: Obscure OS ramblings Re: The games are all crap; let's make a decent one."**Previous message:**Doug Jones: "Re: The games are all crap; let's make a decent one."**In reply to:**Lee Daniel Crocker: "Re: COMP: AI and mathematics: Proofs"**Next in thread:**CYMM: "Re: COMP: AI and mathematics: Proofs"**Messages sorted by:**[ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

*> > In a discussion in another forum, the question of whether computers have
*

*> > "found" valid mathematical proofs has come up.
*

The trivial example is chess, where modern computers have proven

or disproven contentions by grandmasters about an unclear position.

The classic example is the 20th game in the 1972 championship between

Spassky and Fischer where Spassky suddenly resigned in a very

unsettled situation. The top guys argued about it for years, but many

contended that Boris had a shot that would have given him an excellent

chance for at least a draw. Deep Blue "proved" by exhaustive 30 ply

analysis (which is beyond human capacity) that the commie in fact

resigned in a winning position, fully convinced that he was busted.

Fischer had that effect on his opponents. But he would *not* have

so effected a cold blooded computer.

spike

**Next message:**Alejandro Dubrovsky: "Re: COMP: Obscure OS ramblings Re: The games are all crap; let's make a decent one."**Previous message:**Doug Jones: "Re: The games are all crap; let's make a decent one."**In reply to:**Lee Daniel Crocker: "Re: COMP: AI and mathematics: Proofs"**Next in thread:**CYMM: "Re: COMP: AI and mathematics: Proofs"**Messages sorted by:**[ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29
: Mon Oct 02 2000 - 17:35:05 MDT
*