Don (and others),
Depending upon your definition of God, I think most of the "God" conversation is kind of silly. Given He is omnipotent, he has the ability to alter one of His created entities such that it is not possible to beat Him PRIOR to casting His reply as white. The alteration could be as subtle as changing the active potential on some sub-set of neurons in his opponents brain or as acute as creating deep anxiety within his opponent's psyche by being so gargantuan in physical presence. And talk about self-esteem. Hard to top God's opinion of Himself give you are one of His creations. Give He is omniscient, he has no need for generating confusion for His opponent. He already knows his opponents weakness, how it will manifest and why it will do so. That's assuming an omniscient being has any "interest" in casting a stone in the first place, something very difficult to imagine in any sense of the meaning of the words. Given he is omnipresent, he is has/is/will be in a part of the universe where an animation of the game about to be played is already playing out to completion, so he can see how it ends before it begins (a slight lean on his omniscience here). Better, the game he is watching is on a board made of harp strings and with the stones represented by fairies and unicorns. Hey! When your God, you get to make up all sorts of crazy shite. Finally, what is an objectively best move? How would one measure it? It's as if there was some "God knowable" state transition diagram (STD) describing an starting go board where the entry points to the STD (OMG, the sexual references here abound) mostly show black to win. So of that set of initial black moves that perfectly state transition into wins for black, which is objectively superior to the other? The question itself is poorly framed? The moves are all peers. None is superior to the other "win in n moves" candidates, even if their n's vary. The n's only matter if there is some higher value placed on minimizing the number of moves from start to finish. Give He is timeless, the length of game, hence the value of n, is not meaningful. Now, if God had a younger brother who liked to play Go...none of what I said above means anything....which is still true even if He doesn't. (a nod to your "logic" dialog from the other day, Don) Jim ----- Original Message ---- From: Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: computer-go <computer-go@computer-go.org> Sent: Monday, November 27, 2006 11:59:30 AM Subject: Re: [computer-go] .. if Monte-Carlo programs would play infinitestrong A good point to consider - is "God" actively trying to confuse his opponent and complicate things, or is he simply playing objectively best moves? - Don On Mon, 2006-11-27 at 07:39 -0800, steve uurtamo wrote: > > >wow. i thought that there were at least two > > >stones worth of slack in the opening, and another > > >two in ko fighting. :) > > > > Seems unlikely. I can't imagine two competent > > players, say 1p or > > better, coming out of the opening with one of them > > having a two-stone > > lead. > > one of them is not a competent 1p. one of them > is a computer with knowledge of the end result > of all possible game trees (my understanding of > the definition of a "god" player). > > it could, for instance, create an opening whose > branches are so complicated that W (or B) was > forced to take small gains territorially, but > lose, say, 20 pts. by the midgame. > > > And, the right to win all ko fights without > > having to fight them > > is only worth half a stone. > > uh, that depends upon what the kos are for. > > s. > > > > ____________________________________________________________________________________ > Sponsored Link > > $420k for $1,399/mo. > Think You Pay Too Much For Your Mortgage? > Find Out! www.LowerMyBills.com/lre > _______________________________________________ > computer-go mailing list > computer-go@computer-go.org > http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ _______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
_______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
