Will Quantum Computers solve Chess?

@TheDiamondTiger said in #10:
> one of my friends told me if chess is solved, white might have an obvious winning chance. if this happens, chess as a sport would not be played by as many people
looking at computer/pro player chess, its more likely solved chess is a draw

@Finnfinity said in #11:
> looking at computer/pro player chess, its more likely solved chess is a draw
tbh both options are likely.

@TheDiamondTiger said in #12:
> tbh both options are likely.
I guess we can agree that black winning is extremely unlikely

@TheDiamondTiger said in #10:
> one of my friends told me if chess is solved, white might have an obvious winning chance. if this happens, chess as a sport would not be played by as many people
As others have said it makes no difference in human play if computers have solved chess or not. Because you're not allowed to consult the computer when you're playing lol. And you can't opening prep all of chess because your brain would have to be bigger than the whole universe to remember all that information. So no need to worry, chess being solved would be a great accomplishment for computer science but have no impact in real human games.

@TheDiamondTiger said in #10:
> one of my friends told me if chess is solved, white might have an obvious winning chance. if this happens, chess as a sport would not be played by as many people

You seem to have missed my point entirely. Even if chess is solved and it is a win for White, this would not affect humans playing chess.

@Finnfinity said in #11:
> looking at computer/pro player chess, its more likely solved chess is a draw

Yes, it seems extremely likely, I would argue almost certain, that chess is a draw. But in either case, like I said, it would not matter to humans very much at all.

@Nytorpet said in #5:
> ”Solving chess would mean nothing, at least in terms of playing the game.”
>
> It would destroy the beauty of the game. Let’s say that we know for certain that the Marshall Attack in Spanish is unsound and how to defeat it. Or if we know for certain that 7.g3. Is a refutation of the Najdorf in the Sicillian. That would make chess a lot more boring.
still only small fraction of player would no it is refutation and still smaller fraction could hand subsequent moves with accuracy that refutation really works.

And besides solving game is mathematical term with well defined meaning. Even if quantum computer somehow managed to come to conclusion that game draw it would not constitute a proof of that by any means let alone could not tell you best reply to each move.

Start by solving one line. Then ask your self if you can prove there are no errors.

thequantuminsider.com/2023/03/24/quantum-computing-challenges/#:~:text=1.-,ERROR%20CORRECTION,-Most%20experts%20would

quantum computers won't solve chess. It just isn't the sort of problem that they are good at.
And if something does solve chess, that won't stop humans from playing it. See antichess, which is actively being played by 10 people as I type this. The solution to antichess is more complex than a human can memorize, so it is still playable. And I expect the solution to chess to be FAR more complex than that.

Chess is a draw. 800 out of 1200 games against stock fish and alpha zero were draws. The only reason for losses were because they were forced to play different openings. I’m glad it’s a draw. If it’s a win then there’s no point.

It's a draw because of the rules made for humans. The best clock time for chess engines is the hour glass.