lichess.org
Donate

The Castle of Chess Vampires

@IHazABlunder I'm glad you liked it!

Yes, knights can only make even cycles. As simple way to prove it is your alternating square color argument.
This is also discussed in the first post on chess vampires: https://lichess.org/@/ambrona/blog/vampires-in-chess/3MOYWXZY

@IHazABlunder I'm glad you liked it! Yes, knights can only make even cycles. As simple way to prove it is your alternating square color argument. This is also discussed in the first post on chess vampires: https://lichess.org/@/ambrona/blog/vampires-in-chess/3MOYWXZY

@dboing said in #9:

also I am sorry but I am sure there is a 960 position that would be the illegal ancestor of that vampire position mirror. (if I got my arithmetics right here, in words). So it might be a question of goggles this vampire thing. Polarized light maybe.

Yes, there are two such 960-configurations: RQBNKBNR and RNBNKBQR.
In both, the bishop on h6 may have just captured the black queen, which breaks the parity invariant.

But why are you sorry?

@dboing said in #9: > also I am sorry but I am sure there is a 960 position that would be the illegal ancestor of that vampire position mirror. (if I got my arithmetics right here, in words). So it might be a question of goggles this vampire thing. Polarized light maybe. Yes, there are two such 960-configurations: RQBNKBNR and RNBNKBQR. In both, the bishop on h6 may have just captured the black queen, which breaks the parity invariant. But why are you sorry?

@ambrona said in #12:

Yes, there are two such 960-configurations: RQBNKBNR and RNBNKBQR.
In both, the bishop on h6 may have just captured the black queen, which breaks the parity invariant.

But why are you sorry?

That is just filler. Been talking to chat bots a lot in the past month, it stains.

Also, because I do not consider it that illegal... We can break paritiy in both directions and that is still chess to me. The physics of it, the dynamics is the same just the initial condition of the full ambient position space can be varied.

yet. The parity invariance as a class restriction, I find more important to name. So I appreciate your work

i.e.: I feel that the thing to name is not a positoin. but a relation between 2 position. Has this pair of position in a single continuation segment** a relation of parity invariance or not. The vampire naming feels nice to highten the word play attention (and in some retrograde mathematicals fields they run out of meaningful words and start going there a lot, it seems from my other math. vantage point, or maybe the english they choose does not resonate to my initially french native mind, but no, I remember even in french, there were names I found not really helpful on the meta math. of it, i.e. the relation with the external world was lost to me, where math. is not formal logic, but drives the logic language calling out with names. I might be sorry about your choice of emphasis on a position class rather that a relation beween pairs, that could extend far beyond the ancestor of the 2 always being that cramped one.

even pedagogically, it was not until I broke free of that distraction that I started understanding. Might just be me.

**game segment, or mini-game segment not necessarily from any maximally cramped initial condition but any mobility ruleset connect pair.

I stand behind my weird choice of words. please do scrutinize. i have a small brain, and do not pretend otherwise.

Erratum: maybe I meant meta-logic not meta math. depends on the life long math. path vantage point. I came from physics, it made a dent perhaps. But I was not confortable there either.. I might have drank some other type of math. tea and found my own path of least pain and most fun/beauty/imagination/not getting bore alone.

@ambrona said in #12: > Yes, there are two such 960-configurations: RQBNKBNR and RNBNKBQR. > In both, the bishop on h6 may have just captured the black queen, which breaks the parity invariant. > > But why are you sorry? That is just filler. Been talking to chat bots a lot in the past month, it stains. Also, because I do not consider it that illegal... We can break paritiy in both directions and that is still chess to me. The physics of it, the dynamics is the same just the initial condition of the full ambient position space can be varied. yet. The parity invariance as a class restriction, I find more important to name. So I appreciate your work i.e.: I feel that the thing to name is not a positoin. but a relation between 2 position. Has this pair of position in a single continuation segment** a relation of parity invariance or not. The vampire naming feels nice to highten the word play attention (and in some retrograde mathematicals fields they run out of meaningful words and start going there a lot, it seems from my other math. vantage point, or maybe the english they choose does not resonate to my initially french native mind, but no, I remember even in french, there were names I found not really helpful on the meta math. of it, i.e. the relation with the external world was lost to me, where math. is not formal logic, but drives the logic language calling out with names. I might be sorry about your choice of emphasis on a position class rather that a relation beween pairs, that could extend far beyond the ancestor of the 2 always being that cramped one. even pedagogically, it was not until I broke free of that distraction that I started understanding. Might just be me. **game segment, or mini-game segment not necessarily from any maximally cramped initial condition but any mobility ruleset connect pair. I stand behind my weird choice of words. please do scrutinize. i have a small brain, and do not pretend otherwise. Erratum: maybe I meant meta-logic not meta math. depends on the life long math. path vantage point. I came from physics, it made a dent perhaps. But I was not confortable there either.. I might have drank some other type of math. tea and found my own path of least pain and most fun/beauty/imagination/not getting bore alone.

@dboing said in #13:
Now you're just trying to make up for not knowing what retract means...

@dboing said in #13: Now you're just trying to make up for not knowing what retract means...

ok. maybe i could try to recap my fading memory of this.

The elements:

mirror of a position:
This is where I tend to go a bit wild. It could mean more than one thing. The one I like for how it tickles my synapses is the paint. You switch the paint on the pieces.

I am sure the author has only one in mind, but my memory or just my mind is very slippery, so I look around a lot, and sometimes, making stuff up helps me compensate for that kind of sloppy memory (perhaps it might be another kind of memory... one that fills in the gaps of the other? Regularly, perhaps?

When does it become confabulation, perhaps as I get older it will, or maybe that is the time now, I am getting older, when will I notice then having gone there?).

ok, I stop, I thought I could do this. But that might be a lot of rambling to go. See only for mirror, I have done this. I am sorry.

ok. maybe i could try to recap my fading memory of this. The elements: > mirror of a position: This is where I tend to go a bit wild. It could mean more than one thing. The one I like for how it tickles my synapses is the paint. You switch the paint on the pieces. I am sure the author has only one in mind, but my memory or just my mind is very slippery, so I look around a lot, and sometimes, making stuff up helps me compensate for that kind of sloppy memory (perhaps it might be another kind of memory... one that fills in the gaps of the other? Regularly, perhaps? When does it become confabulation, perhaps as I get older it will, or maybe that is the time now, I am getting older, when will I notice then having gone there?). ok, I stop, I thought I could do this. But that might be a lot of rambling to go. See only for mirror, I have done this. I am sorry.