Chess Online

Play online chess!

Pages:  « Previous 1 2 3 Next »
From	Message
clashofpawns 12-Feb-18, 01:53	It's called tetration and I use it all the time! And in general, the hyper operator or knuth's up arrow notation. Look up Graham's Number!
itchynscratchy 12-Feb-18, 02:33	<<Within a year, my IQ had soared to over 300>> That post was satire, right?
clashofpawns 12-Feb-18, 03:15	> That post was satire, right? You're very weird.
itchynscratchy 12-Feb-18, 04:05	Is that a yes?
clashofpawns 12-Feb-18, 04:06	knowyourmeme.com
stalhandske 12-Feb-18, 04:09	I've said it before, and I say this again: Please. do NOT , make posts with just a link without at least some explanation!
itchynscratchy 12-Feb-18, 04:10	Urgh, memes.
clashofpawns 12-Feb-18, 04:10	stalhandske It was a direct answer to his question. I stand by the post 100%
stalhandske 12-Feb-18, 04:14	No posts with links only! <It was a direct answer to his question. I stand by the post 100%> That's not the point. The point is that I don't want situations where people have to open a link in order to follow a discussion. After this, anyone doing it anyway run the risk of having their post deleted - no further explanations.
clashofpawns 12-Feb-18, 04:16	What is the problem with someone having to click that link?
lord_shiva 12-Feb-18, 08:04	Meme I have never seen or heard of the referenced program, but it should have been fairly clear Clash was quoting or referencing some fantasy script. 150 is pushing the edge of the normalized IQ Bell curve. Scores much beyond that estimated using essay style questions. Similarly, below fifty and you enter the realm of worms and maybe really responsive fronds. Venus Flytraps do not eat pollinator insects, which demonstrates some sort of intelligence. Below that you have rocks, which resist breaking. Sacks of hammers. 300 is a fantasy number. But the detail in the post suggested some obscure literary or cultural reference. We did not get programming like this out on the reservation. Quote Shakespeare and half of us won't recognize it. The other half may miss half of the references, and a small percent (Pawntificator style) will insist the quote is from Francis Bacon.
itchynscratchy 12-Feb-18, 08:20	<<I have never seen or heard of the referenced program, but it should have been fairly clear Clash was quoting or referencing some fantasy script.>> My most humble apologies, but rest assured next time you fail to grasp something I'll be sure to pile on even when it is not necessary.
clashofpawns 12-Feb-18, 22:41	lord_shiva > My most humble apologies, but rest assured next time you fail to grasp something I'll be sure to pile on even when it is not necessary. You've been warned. Prepare for itchynscratchy's attack!
clashofpawns 12-Feb-18, 22:43	*tosses 10 pieces of popcorn in the air individually and catches each one in my mouth in this type of rhythm:* 5 rapid tosses, catch first while tossing 6th, rapid bite to crush 1st piece while tossing 7th, catch second, rapid swallow of first piece then rapid bite to crush second piece, toss 8th, etc. You get the idea but I think the important point is that it looks cool and everyone, especially stalhandske, is impressed.
stalhandske 12-Feb-18, 23:18	Yes, very
the-sigularity 13-Feb-18, 17:49	clash In my life, I have had no need for such knowledge, had I learned the math as you, I would have had no need for that, especially not now, at my retired age. That does not mean I do not admire and am actually awed by your intelligence, so I congratulate you, and feel happy that you have found a place where you can apply all you have learned, and have fun while doing so. It also makes me feel proud that you have chosen to be a member of our club, and that I can call you my friend. I would like to ask a question that I have heard. I know that math has connection to chess, but what I know, is at a very low level. The question then is, how much math can actually be applied to chess, at a higher level, or at least associated, besides the lower type, with which most of us are familiar, if at all?
lord_shiva 13-Feb-18, 18:42	Dog Pile on Itchy It was intended as a general observation, not as any sort of personal attack. IHS seems to think I have some personal vendetta against him too. Actually, I had contemplated a defense of Clash's link post as an answer to the post right before it, but this is Stalhandske's forum and he can run it however he sees fit--especially given he foots the bill. So I held my piece. Links really ought to have some explanatory text anyway. I cannot watch YouTube on the device very well, and am reluctantant to play them at work.
clashofpawns 13-Feb-18, 22:42	> It also makes me feel proud that you have chosen to be a member of our club, and that I can call you my friend. Thanks but I feel more proud that the club invited and accepted and puts up with me! > how much math can actually be applied to chess My opinion on that is that it's like music. People often talk about the relationship between music and math but beyond arithmetic, there isn't a lot. The frequency multipliers will end up going up by nth roots of some ratio. Hold a string at the half way point to go up an octave. In chess it's about permutations. The number of possible positions after n moves or the number of positions in k-man tablebases or stuff like that. Curiosities really. A fun pastime that has more math to it is twisty puzzle solving and juggling   Both are very amenable to group theory
clashofpawns 13-Feb-18, 22:44	lord_shiva > Actually, I had contemplated a defense of Clash's link post as an answer to the post right before it, but this is Stalhandske's forum and he can run it however he sees fit--especially given he foots the bill. Roughly my thinking on the issue. I had thought to argue the point more. But decided against it. Not worth the energy and not that big a deal.
nambam 14-Feb-18, 00:36	what do the adherents to this discussion consider to be the ontological status of numbers?
clashofpawns 14-Feb-18, 00:43	nambam Are you asking if numbers exist basically or are just figments of our imagination? Because that's getting too metaphysical for me. I don't get paid enough to think on that level!
nambam 14-Feb-18, 00:53	yes it is a metaphysical question which has been debated in philosophy for ages. the question i think is whether they exist as entities in themselves, or are an system invented by an intelligent species such as our own to count things and so on. I personally dont know, but a few of u who in my opinion are far in advance of me in maths and science, i thought might have some opinions.
clashofpawns 14-Feb-18, 00:59	I've thought about it but found it difficult to come to even an opinion on the matter. I only recently decided that I consider mathematics more invented than discovered. So in that sense I suppose one could argue that I consider numbers to be somewhat imagine. They're symbols, arbitrary that relate to quantity. So the real question is "is the notion of quantity" and specific tiers and thresholds of that dimension universally inherent entities. I would still say no. I'd see three rubber duckies as entirely concrete and the notion of "three" as entirely abstract. But that's just me. I only dabble in one specific area of philosophy, namely math.
nambam 14-Feb-18, 01:16	i tend to agree that they are an invented system, rather than meta physical entities existing in their own right in some sort of platonic other world. one of the main problems with philosophy is that it has tended to throw up unanswerable questions,like can God if he exists construct a box he/she can't open. I was curiuos about Grahams number ,not least because my surname is Graham. I had never heard of it,but will read up on it,because there can't be a final number can there, as you can always add to it. i wish i had studied more maths in my younger days, but thats life.
clashofpawns 14-Feb-18, 01:20	> i wish i had studied more maths in my younger days, but thats life. It's never too late! Math is a beautiful portrait, being painted ad infinitum. Our minds are similar.. until death.
lord_shiva 14-Feb-18, 07:12	Math is Discovered Consider Newton and Liebnitz. There was a Chinese mathematician who discovered calculus at roughly the same time. All three invented their own unique notations, but the concept is essentially the same. The ideas exist independent of the notation created to express them Languages themselves express concepts that, without words, cannot be adequately expressed. So many arguments boil down to semantics---different definitions. Enormously frustrating and personally irritating.
lord_shiva 14-Feb-18, 07:38	Ideas Music, dance, and art convey ideas. Love the work of Banksy. But art can say many things--including thing not thought of by the artist. Language is a more common medium for the exchange of ideas. Do ideas that cannot be expressed exist? Such ideas would remain forever trapped in one's head. My favorite words are those that lack analogs in foreign languages. Every culture has ideas that do not translate well to others. This is especially true for ancient Hebrew. See, our interpretation of their relifpgious beliefs miss the mark by incredibly wide margin, such that much of what we regard as true simply isn't, but is instead an artifact of our own culture, science and technology. In the old days sickness was a curse from God, or a misfortune visited upon victims of wagers lost between Gods (such as Job). The notion of pathogens in drinking water would be as alien as calculus to a typical kindergarten student. My mission in life is to encourage the scientific view as much as possible, because it works, bïtches. You establish a control group to compare results, and work bloody hard to weed out every possible source of error or counter explanation, and ensure you are not deceiving yourself. And ruthlessly apply this to every aspect of your life worth examining. Nothing is above question.
clashofpawns 14-Feb-18, 07:44	I fail to see why simultaneous invention of, for example, something like the wheel or explosives would imply that they were discovered not invented. By your logic nothing is ever really invented I think.
clashofpawns 14-Feb-18, 07:44	> My mission in life is to encourage the scientific view as much as possible, because it works, bïtches www.youtube.com
clashofpawns 14-Feb-18, 07:46	I certainly agree with Dawkins here and have expressed a similar sentiment towards anti-scientific people on multiple occasions. I regard them with contempt and even disgust.
Pages:  « Previous 1 2 3 Next »

GameKnot: play chess online, Internet chess league, chess clubs, monthly chess tournaments, chess teams, online chess puzzles, free online chess games database and more.