[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [computer-go] Addressing the root of the problem



From:
Erik van der Werf <E.vanderWerf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:
Thu, 07 Oct 2004 14:20:02 +0200
To:
computer-go <computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>



Anton Safonov wrote:




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.





Nonsense, 7x7 Go has exactly the same rules as 19x19 Go. Yet it is 
much simpler than Chess.



The system is still not a chaos and calculatable to some extent. And 
this small one is not given a chance to grow big enough to be not coped 
with by usual methods...




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!



I doubt it. To "solve" a complex system you need at least the rules of 
that system (assuming none is redundant).



Why can't you have some sort of "opposite" rules instead? The same 
amount of.




Add to this the rules for describing/operating the mechanism that 
actually does the solving and you will have more rules than in the 
system to be solved.



IMHO, this is exactly the start of the wrong road the most people are 
walking.

Trying to solve the already complex system instead of solving the root 
the system was produced from.



Anton.





_______________________________________________

computer-go mailing list

computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/