User Profile Chessforum
Member since Feb-05-05
Welcome to The Cirque du Boomie where the dancers will kick your teeth out and you have unlimited credit in the casino.


Feb-05-2010 - The Don said so long ago that in 5 years The Cirque would be totally legitimate. Today I see a thriving casino business and fan dancers from Yonkers. Good times!



This is the forum.
The Cirque,
On an average day, people go about their business.
When they get out of line I go to work.
I carry a badge.

Dum De Dum
Dum De Dum De Dum

We were working out of Tactics and Swindles. My partner's name is Jessie. My name's Boomie.


"...the unexamined life is not worth living..." - Socrates from Plato's Apology

“This one of you, O human beings, is wisest, who, like Socrates, recognizes that he is in truth of no account in respect to wisdom.” - Socrates from Plato's Apology

"Wit is the epitaph of an emotion" - Friedrich Nietzsche

"The purpose of art is to lay bare the questions which have been hidden by the answers" - James Baldwin

"I do not know what I may appear to the world, but to myself I seem to have been only like a boy playing on the sea-shore, and diverting myself in finding a smoother pebble or prettier shell than ordinary, whilst the great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered before me." - Sir Isaac Newton

"If I have made any valuable discoveries, it has been owing more to patient attention than to any other talent." - Sir Isaac Newton

"In oneself lies the whole world and if you know how to look and learn, the door is there and the key is in your hand. Nobody on earth can give you either the key or the door to open, except yourself." - Krishnamurti

"Truth is a pathless land." - Krishnamurti

"The more I practise, the luckier I get." - Gary Player

"Sacred cows make the best hamburger." - Mark Twain

"People don't stop playing because they get old. They get old because they stop playing." - GB Shaw

"Today is a good day to get mated." - Lakota mystic Red Rook


Given that a thought dies shortly after birth, the writer is a mortician whose job is to make it smile.

The unexamined position is not worth playing.

Play ideas not moves.

A beautiful solution for which there is no problem.

Professor, don't get on that ship! That book, To Serve Man, it's a chess book!

Have pawn. Will travel.

The Cirque - Your best choice for a second location.

<If Gilbert and Sullivan Played Chess>

Though it may seem quite incongruous
And it makes so little sense to us,
She is an English fan.
Yes she is an English fan.

Though she may seem a bit mannish,
She would never play the Spanish.
'Cause she is an English fan.
Yes she is an English fan.

Neither Russian, French nor Catalan
'Cause she always wants to get her man.
So she is an English fan.
Yes she is an English fan.

<With apologies to George M. Cohan>

D-z-indzi-chashvili spells Zindchinhashvalley.

Proud of all the Cossack blood that's in me

Praise the man who says my name correctly

D-z-indzi-chashvili you see

It's a shame that my name has never been pronounced quite like

Ginchinsmokedhashverily, that's me!

<CG Haiku>

She had me at "Heh".
Much jibber jabber ensued.
It's all about chess. Full Member
   Current net-worth: 592 chessbucks
[what is this?]

   Boomie has kibitzed 11038 times to chessgames   [more...]
   Apr-17-14 Boomie chessforum
Boomie: <DcGentle> Scientific American had an article on "Wallpaper for the Mind" many years ago. These are created by using a recursive function and painting dots on the screen. Many processes in nature are recursive and the patterns created by these functions imitate life forms. The
   Apr-17-14 WCC Editing Project chessforum (replies)
Boomie: - The dragged on negotiations drag on contentiously. How about: "The contentious negotiations continued." Although "dragged on" implies a continuation with no end in sight, we haven't established whether the negotiations were taking longer than some standard. For that matter, we ...
   Apr-17-14 Paul Morphy (replies)
Boomie: <Conrad93: She's good at what she does, but she is not a credible source> Can you cite an example? Sarah has made every effort to document her Morphy page. Are you saying that only contemporaries of Morphy are credible sources? Or, as I suspect, are you just trolling?
   Apr-15-14 Rubinstein vs Tarrasch, 1923
Boomie: <john barleycorn: <Boomie> Kmoch mentions that in case of the exchanges on f1 black has to unpin the knight.> Black moves the king to e7 and then plays Nd7. Although the engines like white a lot, there is no apparent way to exploit the advantage. Play it out and post some
   Apr-11-14 twinlark chessforum (replies)
Boomie: <visayanbraindoctor: Going back to the Penrose and Hameroff theory of micro-tubules being the basis for consciousness due to quantum mechanical effects, are they not simply too big?> There are electrons on the tubules that may be available for quantum effects. From the link I ...
   Mar-24-14 Alekhine vs Lasker, 1924 (replies)
Boomie: <Chris321> Lasker would be a top player today. According to Chessmetrics, his peak rating was 2878 . Notice the dips in rating caused by Lasker's many breaks from chess. Chessmetrics punishes inactivity. Using today's rating methods, ...
   Mar-23-14 Anand vs Topalov, 2014 (replies)
Boomie: What a round for Anand! Not only is he winning, but both Kramnik and Aronian are losing. Go figure. Only a miracle will prevent Carlsen-Anand II
   Mar-21-14 Zsuzsa Polgar vs J Benjamin, 1985
Boomie: <HeMateMe: Why is the game drawn? White is up material and seems to have beaten back the black attack.> Material is about even. R+P vs B+N. A guy rated 100 points higher than you offers a draw, you will probably take it unless you see something concrete.
   Mar-14-14 Wen Yang vs Yifan Hou, 2014 (replies)
Boomie: <Bruce Graham: I am not sure why Yifan Hou loses here.> Hou is playing black and wins being 2 pawns up in an endgame.
(replies) indicates a reply to the comment.

Cirque du Boomie

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 183 OF 183 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Premium Chessgames Member
  DcGentle: <achieve>: Just see it as a "thought experiment" ;-) Of course it won't happen.
Did you have a look at the links I gave?

Sean Carrol's book is not bad, but apparently only the first 2 chapters are online, if you visit the website with Javascript turned off, you'll get a transscript of the text. I am reading this now. It makes sense, somehow.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Boomie: <DcGentle>

Thanks for all the links. I just finished limping through the article on entropy and structures in the universe. The results indicate that black holes dominate the entropic landscape. Since the entropy of objects is lost when they plunge into a black hole, the assumption is that the increase in entropy of the black hole is somehow larger. Like so much of modern physics, this makes little common sense but the math seems persuasive.

Premium Chessgames Member
  DcGentle: Sean Carrol's book on time is a good read, he gives an insight into the context of entropy and the arrow of time.

The above transscript has it all, I read it and formatted it, in order to make it more readable, and you can quote ;-)

Get it from here:

(Click on "Download this file")

Premium Chessgames Member
  Boomie: <DcGentle: Sean Carrol's book on time>


Carrol supports the multiverse to explain why our universe started with low entropy. Seems like an awfully radical explanation but I can't think of another reason.

Premium Chessgames Member
  DcGentle: <Boomie>: Well, yes, looks like it. The prerequisite may be, that the multiverse was always around and will always be around. Well, could be, what do we know?

BTW, some time ago I wrote an article about <Time, Space, and Matter in Chess> (DcGentle chessforum).

Since then, I have gained some more insight, for example the initiative in chess is an <advantage in time>.

But now I am wondering whether there is something like "entropy" in chess.

Looking at the initial position, I would agree that there is, if you define this as the condition before the start of the game, the "Big Bang" in chess. ;-)

And watching how GM's are often "blitzing" the first moves of the opening, maybe there is even an "inflation" in chess as well. Ok, this is a bit too far fetched, I guess. ;-)

But then there have to be microstates and macrostates in chess as well. A microstate would be each chess position, but what are the macrostates? Hard to say.

Chess has several abstraction levels, starting from the lowest level of the simple control influence of pieces on squares to the highest level, that is game progress. Maybe macrostates can be found on some of these abstraction levels.

Anyways, I find these parallels of the chess universe to the real one astonishing, and this is an understatement.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Boomie: <DcGentle>

We all tend to go a little overboard with analogies. We could say, for example, that a chess position with 30 legal moves has more entropy than one with 20. However chess games tend to progress from a few possible moves to some maximum and then to few moves again. This is very unlike entropy. The concept of disorder may have relevance to my games but has no place in master games.

A macro state might indicate a sequence of moves to achieve some idea. For example, a line leading to a good outpost for a knight could be considered a macro state. However I wonder how useful such knowledge could be to the player. Could there be some kind of math to express it? I dunno.

Premium Chessgames Member
  DcGentle: Well, anyways I was not the first to connect entropy and chess:

But the article is not very eloquent on the details.

Here there is another contribution from the view of a chess composer:


Premium Chessgames Member
  DcGentle: I like this notion, that living things are fighting the increase of disorder, that is, they are fighting against the increase of entropy.

But in the end the single organism has to lose, the comfort is, that the species might live longer. But even this can become extinct, as we know.

Premium Chessgames Member
  DcGentle: From (Click on the first link)

<Chaos and Life: Complexity and Order in Evolution and Thought> by Richard J. Bird

page 195

<Entropy and Time

Entropy in a sense defines time, because entropy always increases with time, because what is measured by entropy is the result of iterative moves, as in a chess game. But the orderliness can be regarded the same, with the moves absorbing the orderliness lost by the board. In the case of the chess board we are apparently adding information with each new move. This makes the board position look more complicated as time goes on. However, if all the moves are written down at the start of the game, for instance, if we are re-playing a game from the newspaper, there is no information added; it is simply interchanged between one form of representation (the written moves) and another (the board position). Thus the moves plus the board position contain constant orderliness at each moment. This could be expressed in terms of information by saying that the information was constant, with the information added by the moves being gained by the board positions. Now these iterative moves do not actually add information to the situation - they simply redistribute it. But if the game is actually played, is the situation any different? For here the representation is in terms of brain states and their precursors, which are to be found in other events.

In the evolution of the world we have a different situation. Here the moves are not written down or in the brain of a player; they are the outcome of the laws governing particle moves. Since these laws are invariant(if we have found the right laws), how can they add information to the world? It seems to be the process of iteration that adds the information: that is, it is time that adds the information. Information <must> be added, for it is not, very odd things will happen: chaos theory predicts that, if no new information is added, the <<<<world will very rapidly grind to a halt>>>>.>

My two cents:

Some authors have no idea what it means to play a chess game. The moves are <not> just "in the brain of the players". It's a painful process to find a decent move in a chess game, once the opening is over.

I am just quoting this paragraph because of the last sentence, <if no new information is added, the world will very rapidly grind to a halt.> This is new to me, but may be conceivable.

Premium Chessgames Member
  DcGentle: Interesting site explaining chaos theory:

Premium Chessgames Member
  DcGentle: Fractal cosmology (well, appears to be a fringe area)

Premium Chessgames Member
  DcGentle: Of course Carrol is not the only one to write about new insights in cosmology:

<Cycles of Time: An Extraordinary New View of the Universe>

By Professor Penrose, release 2011

gets a review here:

The name "Penrose" should not be unknown to readers of Carrol's book, and from the review it's clear that both authors may only differ in the way they explain the next cycle of the universe. Interesting, nevertheless.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Boomie: <DcGentle>

A rather bewildering array of links.

We seem to have lost <achieve> who initiated the discussion about time. I don't know why. He should let me know what his intentions are. Or at least that's what I would do for a friend.

Anyway, we haven't made much headway on the time subject and without graduate level work in math and cosmology, we probably won't. It's fun to read about even if I don't understand more than 10% of it.

Premium Chessgames Member
  DcGentle: <Boomie>: Yes, the matter is complicated for sure, in every regard. If physicists deem space and time one thing, with their models having access to all points in spacetime, we ordinatry people feel like prisoners of time, because we cannot just go back for a day and repeat it in one way or the other.

For our minds only the present may be real, but what is "real" in this context?

Carrol says in his book, we cannot remember the future due to the arrow of time. Does this implicate that all events are determined already? I doubt this very much, to be honest.

Chaos theory says something different, by the way, and I didn't know that our solar system is not stable. But we have to wait for more than 100 million years to notice the impact.

Apr-05-14  achieve: Well, I haven't gone missing in the traditional sense, but I do take resp for conking out after I left a post that I thought got deleted, after which I decided to take a break; that's about the story.

Other than that I have not much to add, but indeed so many questions remain.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Boomie: <achieve: I left a post that I thought got deleted>

I don't delete posts unless asked to by the poster.

After wandering aimlessly through some of the links on time, I have no hope of understanding much of it.

One of the biggest questions is "How did the early universe get to a low entropy state?" The answers put forward are right out of sci-fi books. Without an answer to that, we'll never really understand time.

Apr-05-14  achieve: <Boomie> I know you don't suddenly delete, so there must have been a wire failure on my part - dark energy may be involved - and considering this to be days after the fact, the question begging to be answered is one of chronology and synchronicity.

Lest not forget consciousness. Oddly similar.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Boomie: <achieve> Not to mention aliens and sasquatch.
Premium Chessgames Member
  DcGentle: <Boomie>: When I was much younger, I was much into Sci-Fi-Books. Not so much nowadays. ;-)

But it can be fun to google around for issues connected to cosmology.

I cannot claim that I understand everything there, although I have an advantage, I studied physics as second subject for some time on university. But this was many years ago, nevertheless the topic stays interesting for me.

Currently I found a short review about
<Quantum cosmology and the hard problem of the Conscious Brain>

There was a reference to quantum entanglement:

<In the transactional interpretation of non-local events, when a measurement is made on an entangled particle, it sends a photon back in time to when it and the other entangled particle were emitted, and then forward in time to the second entangled particle. Thus the net time taken to send the quantum information about the measurement of the first particle is zero, and the effect of measurement on the second particle appears to be instantaneous, despite the spatial gap between them. The backward travel in time, which looks like an exotic feature is allowed by the laws of physics as embodied in both the Maxwell and Schrödinger equations.>

This phenomenon stays a mystery somehow. But here we apparently see a backward travel in time, and some physicists believe that time travel might be possible even on a macroscopic level, if the civilization had the means to manipulate worm holes.

This also sounds like science fiction, but renowned experts of relativity did research of the issue and even published results saying that's possible in theory.


Premium Chessgames Member
  DcGentle: Not only we are asking ourselves what time really is:
(Decent collection of articles)

And I had to scribble down something too:
DcGentle chessforum


Premium Chessgames Member
  Boomie: <DcGentle> Perhaps one analogy that might help your chess engine is degrees of freedom. As we saw in our game against Akobian, the side with more possible moves has an advantage. The engines routinely calculate the number of possible moves. Usually the side with more possibilities is better. This could maybe be extended to the value of each piece, excluding pawns.
Premium Chessgames Member
  DcGentle: <Boomie>: Yes, thanks, I will take into account these degrees of freedom for sure. In a certain way this is already done in current engines via the value of piece mobility. This mobility is a purely positional measure and in current engines it has to be integrated into the eval. But if you do this as a programmer, you have to ask yourself how important piece mobility is in comparison to winning a piece, for example, and this can be only considered on a general level, because the eval has to be calculated without any influence of similar positions in the current situation.

So there is a dilemma, because the programmer can't know how important piece mobility is at the very moment, and generally seen it ranks way beyond winning a piece, for example. In practice it happens often enough that a piece is only cramped for a certain while, so generally this assessment is right. But there are cases as we know, where this is not true and pieces are helpless until the end of the game.

This is a fundamental problem of current algorithms and contributes to the fact that the positional assessment of current engines is weak. My engine can estimate the importance of piece mobility much better. But this is not the only factor needed for good positional play. Bringing up and configuring reinforcements is a more serious problem. But I hope I can solve this too.

Premium Chessgames Member
  DcGentle: By the way, our discussion about time lead me to chaos theory and fractal pictures, and I decided to download a fractal generator, and then some more of them, because these programs are free and small. And they are fun to work with.

Why is this? Especially if you download a 3D fractal generator like "Mandelbulb 3D" (highly recommended), you can detect creatures in the produced pictures really often, it's amazing.

Here there is but one example:

Of course I needed some time to get accustomed to this program in order to produce the above picture, but if you think about it, the first fractal picture I ever produced was about one week ago. And you don't need to know anything about the mathematical background really. The art is to surf through the spaces generated by the functions which only need to be selected and which can be combined for better results. There are examples, so this is quite straight forward.

If you want to watch some more pictures, just click here:

It's fun. :-)

(By the way, a more serious question is:
Why do we detect these creatures in purely abstract pictures generated by purely mathematical functions? I didn't edit the above picture on onedrive to put these creatures in there, no, as you can see from the Google images, others have detected these things before. Is it the way our brain works, just an optical illusion? Or is there more behind this problem? Mathematics can describe physics rather well, you know. Amazingly well, and others have pondered this question before:


Premium Chessgames Member
  DcGentle: Here there is a beginner's tutorial for Mandelbulb 3D:

You can download the program from here:

Click on the zip-file.


Premium Chessgames Member
  Boomie: <DcGentle>

Scientific American had an article on "Wallpaper for the Mind" many years ago. These are created by using a recursive function and painting dots on the screen. Many processes in nature are recursive and the patterns created by these functions imitate life forms.

The idea is to create a simple math function, start with any number, and then use the result as the seed for the next cycle. Each result is mapped to a pixel on the screen.

The function calls itself with its own result. This is known as a recursive function. This is analogous to plant growth which builds on what came before. You can play with colors, say all results divisible by 3 are red or something. Eventually a pattern appears on the screen. This is a fun and instructive exercise for any programmer.

Fractals refer to fractional exponents and are a different class of functions. However recursiveness is a part of the process. The Mandelbrot set is created by testing values in the loop to see if they increase to infinity or not.

Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 183)
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 183 OF 183 ·  Later Kibitzing>

100% Cotton Chess Puzzle Shirt
NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply. Getting your account takes less than a minute, 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 login now.
Please observe our posting guidelines:
  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, or duplicating posts.
  3. No personal attacks against other users.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
Blow the Whistle See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform an administrator.

NOTE: Keep all discussion on the topic of this page. This forum is for this specific user and nothing else. If you want to discuss chess in general, or this site, you might try the Kibitzer's Café.
Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of, its employees, or sponsors.
Participating Grandmasters are Not Allowed Here!

You are not logged in to
If you need an account, register now;
it's quick, anonymous, and free!
If you already have an account, click here to sign-in.

View another user profile:

home | about | login | logout | F.A.Q. | your profile | preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | new kibitzing | chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Little ChessPartner | privacy notice | contact us
Copyright 2001-2014, Chessgames Services LLC
Web design & database development by 20/20 Technologies