Go

[Kefit]

Re: Go

lmfao nice stealing from my photobucket account Kilga

I'm surprised whatever original thread I posted that in is still around. Liquidsushi iirc?

[Kilgamayan]

Re: Go

Yes.

[Kefit]

Re: Go

NO.

[ebs2002]

Re: Go

the number of game possibilities is so large the if each digit was the size of an atom, the chain of numbers would streych across the know universe one thousand trillion times.

Uhm, I hate to be a nay-sayer, but...no? That number would be a Googleplex to the Googleplex to the Googleplex(...)power

[Reach]

Re: Go

Too bad we don't know how big the known universe is. It's billions of lightyears across. Go probably has 10^100 possible moves (estimate). I don't think you could stretch it all the way across space. =/


I've never really played Go much, but I've been meaning to try to learn how to play it. I'm more of a chess man, with some occasional checkers, playing about GM level chess. I've watched a few games of Go before and it looks pretty interesting, so once midterms are over ;o

[ebs2002]

Re: Go

We absolutely know the size of the known universe. That's sorta the definition of "known universe". It's the universe as we know it (not the actual universe).

The size of the known universe is approximately 78 billion light years.

[Reach]

Re: Go

That's not true, for sure. Using WMAP data we can get that figure based on things we can actually see.


However, WMAP has also shown a lot of evidence for inflation where how fast the universe was expanding is pretty hazy. It could be quite a bit bigger than what we are able to see, and since we indirectly know about it, I would say that is 'known' as well.

We also don't know what the shape of the universe is. Good luck with that one. 90-97% of the data suggests it's flat , but this is only looking at topographical geometry based on the radiation data, this really doesn't tell us what shape it is, and the remaining data contradicts a flat universe. They've been working on this for awhile, and some cone topographies and dodecahedrons have come up to try to explain this but we still don't know.


BTW, 78 billion light years is the radius.

And without that information solid conclusions are impossible. That's like saying back in teh day the earth was 50 kilometers across or something because that's as far as you can see.

[sjoecool1991]

Re: Go

9.3x10^567 no capture games.
10^7.49x10^48 capture games.

These are just estimates, there are probably more possibilities.

[sjoecool1991]

Re: Go

Ok, sorry for the bump and double post, but here is an awesome online tutorial. If you want to learn how to play, definately do this.

http://playgo.to/interactive/

[Reach]

Re: Go

Almost all of those moves are irrelevant though.

The reason that number is so big is because of the exponential nature of combinations. There are nearly 1e60 possible combinations in chess.

Humans can't calculate anywhere near this number of moves. We calculate like, 3 moves per second. This is effective partially because we throw out all of the irrelevant moves.


Hence we can play go very well because we're clever enough to realize almost all of the moves are not good moves and we concentrate on the few possible moves that are good.



Computers right now can't play go for **** because they can't brute force it and crush any human like they can in checkers, reversi and chess. Newer chess engines are experimenting with computer knowledge and actually teaching the computer to apply its knowledge to make its search far more effective rather than brute forcing through pointless moves.


All of those 10^7.49x10^48 moves will be broken down once computers get better at applying knowledge and they'll beat every human player at Go as well ;(

[T0rajir0u]

Re: Go

reach

go

[Kraezymann]

Re: Go

I like this game. Its challenging and a little addicting too.