Played in Geneva, Switzerland, 3-15 May 2013, as the first of six events in the Women's Grand Prix series 2013-2014. FIDE page: ... [more]
Player: Anna Muzychuk
| page 1 of 1; 11 games
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 5 OF 5 ·
|May-16-13|| ||Kanatahodets: Karyakin also tried to be someone except chess but he failed. McShane changed his focus from chess just because he cannot live on chess only. he is also smart and he knows that he cannot reach magnus' level. he can be one of the best, say like Karyakin,Radjabov, Nakamura. But effort is high and the outcome is uncertain. that's why he changed his profession to one where it is easier to make a living.|
|May-16-13|| ||Kanatahodets: Nicholas cited Lasker, it is true. Emmanuel could be of the level of great Noether, but still this is not the Hilbert's level. It is true that competition and level of math is much higher than of chess. i would compare the first one with NBA and the second one with NHL. more players in math, higher stakes. Someone said, if chess would be popular as math we would have 20 MC! I would add than 10 of them would be from China! I've checked recently the faculty at Princeton math - I haven't found a single Russian but many Chinese. This is very serious, it is no chess.|
|May-16-13|| ||HeMateMe: What is Yifan studying, in school? What if she discovers biology? Will her chess suffer?|
|May-16-13|| ||Kanatahodets: regardin Lasker math. there's a notion of lasker ideal. as far as i remember it is an intersection of prime ideals. i think lasker proved that factorization of any PI ring by such an ideal is a direct sum of prime rings. Then any prime PI ring, at least finite -dimensional, to my knowledge is easily describable. Say for finite dimensional prime ring is a simple ring and thus can be characterized as a sub ring of nxn matrix ring.|
|May-16-13|| ||Kanatahodets: it is a hardly difficult result, but at that time it was something taking into account their cumbersome notations. Even Hilbert theorem 90 can be proved now by any grad student. So lasker worked in abstract algebra. In this field Goettingen school started its spur with Emmi Noether and her students. So lasker couldn't compete with great Emmi and he realized that it is safer to come back to the pastures where he was unbeaten.|
|May-16-13|| ||norami: < Kanatahodets> I've read that the chance that a number is prime is the inverse of it's natural log, but that hasn't been proven and proving it is the most important problem in mathematics. Any truth to that?|
|May-16-13|| ||Kanatahodets: <norami: < Kanatahodets> I've read that the chance that a number is prime is the inverse of it's natural log, but that hasn't been proven and proving it is the most important problem in mathematics. Any truth to that?> NO!!! It was proved in XIX century by Hadamard and VPoussen. Truly genius result! But Laster's theorem is related to prime ideals of non-commutative rings (he could consider commutative rings - I don't know). It is an analog of a prime number. For example for Z all ideals are pZ where p is a prime number. When you factorize Z/pZ you get Z_p - the field which is very easy to analyze.|
|May-16-13|| ||Kanatahodets: Norami, you may have in mind the Riemann hypothesis. This is truly THE MOST important problem in all math. BTW, prime number theorem and the Riemann hypo are related but for the theorem you need a much weaker version of RH. RH is the behemoth of all problems.|
|May-16-13|| ||norami: I thought the prime number theorem was that as x approaches infinity the percentage of integers less than x that are prime approaches the inverse of the natural log of x. But that's not the same thing as RH which says prime numbers form a random sequence over the integers under the probability model of the inverse of the natural log. In plainer but less precise English, the probability a number is prime is the inverse of the natural log. At least, that's the way to bet.|
|May-16-13|| ||Kanatahodets: < norami: the probability a number is prime is the inverse of the natural log. At least, that's the way to bet.> That is true and it was proven long time ago!|
|May-16-13|| ||Kanatahodets: < norami: ...RH which says prime numbers form a random sequence over the integers under the probability model of the inverse of the natural log.> This doesn't make any sense. Sorry.|
|May-16-13|| ||norami: Whatever RH is, I have one more question. WHY is it the most important problem in mathematics?|
|May-16-13|| ||Catholic Bishop: <I haven't found a single Russian but many Chinese. This is very serious, it is no chess.>|
Russians and Eastern Europeans usually do very well at the International Maths Olympiad. Chinese and other East Asians also do pretty well. The only slightly curious exception is India, ranking consistently lower than little countries like Taiwan and Hong Kong at these competitions.
|May-16-13|| ||Kanatahodets: <Catholic Bishop: Russians and Eastern Europeans usually do very well at the International Maths Olympiad. Chinese and other East Asians also do pretty well.> This is very old data; China has 10-15 teams of equal strength and it dominates IMO. Still I don't take IMO seriously. Who cares about fast problem solving?|
|May-16-13|| ||Kanatahodets: < norami: Whatever RH is, I have one more question. WHY is it the most important problem in mathematics?> If I remember well if RH is true it will give us a lot in terms of knowledge of distribution of prime numbers. Much more important than Fermat theorem!|
|May-16-13|| ||nok: <Lasker was a decent mathematician, but not of Poincare or Hilbert dimension.> Uh, you can't hold that against him.|
|May-16-13|| ||perfidious: <nok: <Lasker was a decent mathematician, but not of Poincare or Hilbert dimension.> Uh, you can't hold that against him.>|
Same with the fact that he was not a giant in bridge, while a most capable player, on the order of Terence Reese. It speaks volumes of Lasker's brilliance that he was able to perform to the degree that he did in these disciplines, plus chess.
|May-16-13|| ||HeMateMe: Lasker was also a master of checkers, and he wrote one or two instruction books on the game of backgammon, which, though not nearly as deep as chess, does have a skill component.|
|May-19-13|| ||HeMateMe: Hou finishes at 3/4/4, negative score. Strange. She still seems to be finding her range. She's the best, when she's on.|
|May-19-13|| ||dehanne: Hou might be losing interest in chess.|
|May-19-13|| ||Alien Math: Hou still shows interest in chess her blog notes|
|Jun-22-13|| ||Thanh Phan: <HeMateMe: What is Yifan studying, in school? What if she discovers biology? Will her chess suffer?> Apparently at Peking University Institute of International Relations.|
|Jun-28-13|| ||notyetagm: Wow, how did Khotenashvili go from winning the last GP event to finishing dead last in this one?|
FIDE Women's GP Geneva, 1st => Women Grand Prix Geneva (2013)/Bela Khotenashvili
FIDE Women's GP Dilijian, 12th => FIDE Women's Grand Prix Dilijan (2013)/Bela Khotenashvili
|Jun-28-13|| ||haydn20: < norami: Whatever RH is, I have one more question. WHY is it the most important problem in mathematics? > Technically, The PNT is the claim that the prime-counting function pi(x) is asymptotic to x divided by the natural log of x. That is, pi(x)/(x/ln(x)) --> 1 as x --> infinity. We can restate this as pi(x)/x is approximately equal to 1/ln(x), i.e., the density of the primes among the natural numbers is about 1/ln(x). This means, for example, that the probability that a number less than 1000 is prime is about 1/ln(1000) = 0.145. [The actual density is 0.148.] Since 1/ln(x) --> 0 as x --> infinity, we can loosely say that the probability that a given number is prime is 0. There are various expressions for the error in this approximation. If we had a proof of the Riemann Hypothesis, we
could substantially improve the error estimate. In addition, since the zeta function of the RH pops up all over the place, God only knows what effects the new math that seems necessary to prove the RH will have.|
|May-23-18|| ||offramp: I unintentionally came across a series of press conferences at this event, in one video, on YouTube. |
Oddly, it was not a chess channel, and none of the comments (below the video) are by chess players.
One comment reads:
<I know nothing about chess but I watched the entire 40 minutes twice already....>!
So what is all that about?
The channel it is on, INeedToSleepNow.com> is devoted to <Unintentional ASMR> videos. So what in tarnation is that?
<Autonomous sensory meridian response (ASMR) is a term used for an experience characterised by a static-like or tingling sensation on the skin that typically begins on the scalp and moves down the back of the neck and upper spine. It has been compared with auditory-tactile synesthesia. ASMR signifies the subjective experience of "low-grade euphoria" characterised by "a combination of positive feelings and a distinct static-like tingling sensation on the skin".>
So, that is all self-explanatory.
The channel tries to find videos where this effect occurs entirely unintentionally and collect them together.
It sounds like a load of HOOEY.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 5 OF 5 ·
Spot an error? Please suggest your correction and help us eliminate database mistakes!
NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply.
Getting your account takes less than a minute, is totally anonymous, and 100% free—plus, it
entitles you to features otherwise unavailable.
Pick your username now and join the chessgames community!
If you already have an account, you should
Please observe our posting guidelines:
- No obscene, racist, sexist, profane, raunchy, or disgusting language.
- No spamming, advertising, duplicate or nonsense posts.
- No malicious personal attacks, including cyber stalking, systematic antagonism, or gratuitous name-calling of any member Iincludinfgall Admin and Owners or any of their family, friends, associates, or business interests. If you think someone is an idiot, then provide evidence that their reasoning is invalid and/or idiotic, instead of just calling them an idiot. It's a subtle but important distinction, even in political discussions.
- Nothing in violation of United States law.
- No malicious posting of or linking to personal, private, and/or negative information (aka "doxing" or "doxxing") about any member, (including all Admin and Owners) or any of their family, friends, associates, or business interests. This includes all media: text, images, video, audio, or otherwise. Such actions will result in severe sanctions for any violators.
- NO TROLLING. Admin and Owners know it when they see it, and sanctions for any trolls will be significant.
- Any off-topic posts which distract from the primary topic of discussion are subject to removal.
- The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by Moderators is expressly prohibited.
- The use of "sock puppet" accounts in an attempt to undermine any side of a debate—or to create a false impression of consensus or support—is prohibited.
- All decisions with respect to deleting posts, and any subsequent discipline, are final, and occur at the sole discretion of the Moderators, Admin, and Owners.
- Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.
NOTE: Keep all discussion on the topic of this page.
This forum is for this specific tournament and nothing else. If you want to discuss chess in general, or
this site, visit the Kibitzer's Café.
Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors. All Moderator actions taken are at the sole discretion of the Admin and Owners—who will strive to act fairly and consistently at all times.
your profile |
Premium Membership |
Kibitzer's Café |
Biographer's Bistro |
new kibitzing |
Tournament Index |
Player Directory |
Notable Games |
World Chess Championships |
Opening Explorer |
Guess the Move |
Game Collections |
ChessBookie Game |
Chessgames Challenge |
privacy notice |
Copyright 2001-2019, Chessgames Services LLC