by Meno_ » Tue Dec 05, 2017 3:06 pm
From the looks of this set up , Your suggestion of a supercomputer or a genius perhaps capable of solution on top of Your other suggestion ,, leads to another implication that again, You may have had the answer to the knight move being erroneous all along
.
You agreed with the knight move only to disprove it , and my feeling is that You were quite aware of that bad move immediately, but waited as if to give the impression that the move was yet untested.
Now if the terrible position was an intentional clever ploy, on part of some master or master computer , to set this up so brilliantly, the set up may be a de facto level of playing deserving theabel of master or master intelligence.
However , if the above scenario is not correc, t then all bets are off, and I don't care how many moves the search goes back to find an error, or a stream of errors, there is no implicitness of higher functioning because supercomputers are able at this time to defeat any human master
.
It really can not be admitted that any such scenario is yet present in artificial or human intelligence" therefore it is worth now at this moment to decide. wether other then a hunch, this may be the case.
On that slim argument , tending toward the former suggestion its quite possible to find some satisfactory answer , therefore a further look at this apparently bad position is worth a second look.
Maybe the suggestive nature of the presentation of this is position more than a a far strung implication.