[computer-go] Addressing the root of the problem

[Anton Safonov <anton.safonov@xxxxxxx>]

It is a known fact that Go is more complex than chess. But why?
It is because Go has fewer (and less strict) rules than chess, so it is 
a less organized system and it is closer to the chaos.
Now my hypothesis is: to "solve" a complex system you need a 
(complimentary) system with no more rules than in the system to be solved!

If you specify more rules to the solution, it makes it more organized 
and it won't completely cover the problem.
It is like this: it is possible to approximate higher level function 
with a number of low level curves, but it'll never be 100% match.
And in Go this small difference means a wrong move and a lost game.

This is why there is no real success in the field - all attempts use 
more rules than in the game itself and so will never succeed to play a 
"divine game".
The solution must be some simple rules which produce a system as complex 
as Go itself.

Anyone having thought about it this way?

Good luck,
Anton.

P.S. The topic is more philosophical, than mathematical at the moment, 
so is the language.
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/