Scientists Theorize That “They’re Here”

Scientists theorize that space aliens may already be here, but we don’t recognize them

Andrew Fraknoi, a board member of the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence in Mountain View

Stargazing scientists have recently begun to focus on the prospect of encountering intelligent extraterrestrials, and the more they think about it the more they realize the first meeting probably won’t be with little green men in flying saucers.

What aliens might look like is a growing question among astrobiologists, who are increasingly conjuring up creatures more Lilliputian than mega-brained or reptilian.

“The intriguing possibility is they are, in fact, here, but we just don’t know it,” said Andrew Fraknoi, the emeritus chairman of the astronomy department at Foothill College who recently taught a course on aliens at the University of San Francisco’s Fromm Institute and believes space aliens could very well be microscopic or unrecognizable as a life-form.

Fraknoi is on the board of the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence, known as the SETI Institute, based in Mountain View, where questions about alien civilizations are often discussed. He has long speculated that members of a civilization billions of years old might by now have evolved into a mechanical-biological mix, like a robot with a brain, capable of living for thousands of years as they travel through space.

But it is also possible, he said, that advanced civilizations would have sent into space thousands of tiny canisters holding the germs of life programmed to incubate and grow when they encounter suitable conditions around a star.

“In all the mathematical models, a species that started early in the history of the galaxy and had the will and resources to diffuse could by now have filled many parts of the galaxy with its artifacts or biological spores,” Fraknoi said.

https://www.sfchronicle.com/science/article/Scientists-theorize-that-space-aliens-may-already-15061387.php#photo-19012569

 

 

Possible Mission?

The moves in bold are only the red colored moves as shown over at the ChessBomb. The game contains other colorful, but not red, moves. The moves in bold are what GM Yasser Seriwan

would call “Howlers.” These two women are “grandmasters,” but I am uncertain if they are grandmasters in the sense of what the GRANDMASTER title should be, meaning GM, whether male or female. It could be that each woman is only a WGM, with ChessBomb leaving off the “W”. This is only one of myriad reasons no title should begin with a “W”! As one of the denizens of the House of Pain asked, “How come a woman can be a Woman Grandmaster, but not a Grandmaster, and why can a man not become a Male Grandmaster without becoming a GM?!” Why indeed…
GM Valentina  Gunina 2461

vs GM Dronavalli Harika 2518

Cairns Cup 2020 round 05

1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. g3 g6 4. Bg2 Bg7 5. d3 d6 6. Be3 Rb8 7. Qd2 b5 8. h3 b4 9. Nd1 Bd7 10. f4 e6 11. Nf3 Nge7 12. h4 Nd4 13. h5 Ba4 14. Rc1 Nec6 15. Nxd4 cxd4 16. Bf2 Qa5 17. g4 Bb5 18. h6 Bf6 19. g5 Bd8 20. b3 Rc8 21. O-O O-O 22. Bg3 Qxa2 23. f5 Be7 24. Bh3 exf5 25. exf5 Ra8 26. Nf2 Ne5 27. Ne4 Bxd3 28. Bxe5 Bxe4 29. Bxd4 Qa5 30. Qe3 d5 31. fxg6 hxg6 32. h7+ Kxh7 33. Be6 Bxg5 34. Qxg5 Qd8 35. Bf6 Qb6+ 36. Rf2 fxe6 37. Qh4+ Kg8 38. Qh8+ 1-0

https://www.chessbomb.com/arena/2020-cairns-cup/05-Gunina_Valentina-Harika_Dronavalli

Hugh Siddeley 1974 vs Eduardo Osinaga 1697

Duchamp Cup 2020 round 07

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 e5 5. Bb5+ Bd7 6. Bxd7+ Qxd7 7. Ne2 h6 8. Nbc3 Nf6 9. Ng3 Be7 10. Nh5 O-O 11. Nxf6+ Bxf6 12. Nd5 Bd8 13. g4 Bh4 14. Be3 Na6 15. Rg1 f6 16. Qd2 Bg5 17. O-O-O Qa4 18. Nc3 Bxe3 19. Qxe3 Qb4 20. h4 Qc5 21. Qg3 Rf7 22. Rd2 Nc7 23. g5 fxg5 24. hxg5 hxg5 25. Qxg5 Ne6 26. Qg6 Re8 27. Rh1 Nf4 28. Rh8+ Kxh8 29. Qxf7 Re6 30. Qxb7 Rh6 31. Nd1 Qa5 32. a3 Qc5 33. Kb1 a5 34. Ne3 Kh7 35. Qf7 Rf6 36. Qc4 Qb6 37. Rd1 Rh6 38. Qf7 Nh5 39. Nf5 Qd8 40. Rh1 Qg5 41. Nxh6 Kxh6 42. Rxh5+ Qxh5 43. Qxh5+ Kxh5 44. b4 1-0

https://www.chessbomb.com/arena/2020-duchamp-cup/07-Siddeley_Hugh-Osinaga_Eduardo

Valentina Gunina  vs Dronavalli Harika

Cairns Cup 2020 round 05

1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. g3 g6 4. Bg2 Bg7 5. d3 d6 6. Be3 Rb8 7. Qd2 (Komodo plays 7 Nge2) 7…b5 8. h3 b4 (SF 10 plays 8…a5) 9. Nd1 Bd7 (Houdini’s move. Komodo 13.25 @depth 31 plays 9…a5. Komodo 13.02 @depth 28 likes 9…Nf6)

10. f4 (SF 9 @depth 27 shows 10 a3; Komodo @depth 31 plays 10 Ne2) 10…e6 (Other moves are possible, and better, such as 10…Nf6 and 10…Qc8, but best, according to the Fish, is 10…a5)

11. Nf3 Nge7 12. h4 (12 a3) 12…Nd4 13. h5 (13 Bxd4)

13…Ba4?? (RED MOVE! Although this is a ‘forcing’ move it is a terrible move. There was nothing wrong with simply castling, or even 12…Qc7)

14. Rc1?? (RED MOVE! IM Boris Kogan was fond of saying, “He attack, you defend. You attack, he better defend.” 14. Bxd4 Bxd4 15. Nxd4 cxd4 16. b3 is easy to see and is much better for white) 14…Nec6? (14… Nxf3+ 15. Bxf3 looks normal) 15. Nxd4? (15 h6) 15…cxd4 16. Bf2

16…Qa5? (“Why Mike? Why?” Boris would ask as he moved the black pawn from g6 to g5)

17. g4 Bb5 (Stockfish shows three better moves, 17…h6; gxh5; and 0-0) 18. h6 Bf6 19. g5 (SF wants to play 19. a4 Qxa4 20. b3 Qa5 before playing 21. g5. Other, stronger, players, when annotating a game have been known to add “This is a computer move,” here, as if we humans are not strong enough to understand the program’s logic. I reject this. There is no such thing as a “computer move.” The better moves are there, even if some human Grandmasters cannot fathom the logic behind the better move. It is my contention that there is no such thing as a “computer move” except in the weak mind of the human who continues to write such nonsense)

19…Bd8 (19…Be7 looks natural, does it not?) 20. b3 Rc8? (The two best moves in the position are 20…Qxa2 and 20…e5) 21. O-O O-O (21…e5) 22. Bg3 Qxa2 (again 22…e5) 23. f5

23…Be7 (RED MOVE! 23…Ne5 is much better)

24. Bh3 (24 Nf2 or f6 are better) 24…exf5? (24…gxf5) 25. exf5 Ra8? (PINK MOVE!) 26. Nf2 (26 f6)

26…Ne5?? (RED MOVE!)

27. Ne4? (RED MOVE! 27. Bxe5 dxe5 28. Ra1 and it’s, “Turn out the lights, the party’s over…”) 27…Bxd3? (PURPLE move! 27…Qa5)

28. Bxe5? (RED MOVE! 28 fxg6) 28…Bxe4 29. Bxd4 (PURPLE move! 29. Bxd6 Bxd6 30. Qxd4) 29…Qa5 (PINK move! 29…Qa6) 30. Qe3 (30. Rce1) 30…d5? (RED MOVE! 30… Rae8 31. Qxe4 Bxg5 32. Qg4 Bxc1 33. Rxc1 has got to be better) 31. fxg6 hxg6 (RED MOVE! Not that it matters…) 32. h7+ Kxh7 33. Be6 (RED MOVE! Play 33 Bc8 and put the woman outta her misery, for crying out loud…not that it matters…) 33…Bxg5 34. Qxg5 Qd8 35. Bf6 Qb6+ 36. Rf2 fxe6 37. Qh4+ Kg8 38. Qh8+ 1-0

 

Hugh Siddeley 1974 vs Eduardo Osinaga 1697

Duchamp Cup 2020 round 07

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 e5 5. Bb5+ Bd7 6. Bxd7+ Qxd7 7. Ne2 h6 8. Nbc3 Nf6 9. Ng3 Be7 10. Nh5 O-O 11. Nxf6+ Bxf6 12. Nd5 Bd8 13. g4 Bh4 14. Be3 Na6 15. Rg1 f6 16. Qd2 Bg5 17. O-O-O Qa4 18. Nc3 Bxe3 19. Qxe3 Qb4 20. h4 Qc5

Now the fun begins…

21. Qg3? (Qh3) Rf7? (Nc7) 22. Rd2? (g5) Nc7? (Raf8) 23. g5 fxg5 24. hxg5 hxg5 25. Qxg5 Ne6? (Re8)

26. Qg6? (Qh4) Re8? (Nf4) 27. Rh1 Nf4 28. Rh8+ Kxh8 29. Qxf7 Re6 30. Qxb7 Rh6 31. Nd1 Qa5 32. a3 Qc5? (Kh7) 33. Kb1? (b4) a5? (Qa5) 34. Ne3 Kh7? (Ne6) 35. Qf7? (Rd1) Rf6? (Qc8) 36. Qc4? (Qd7) Qb6? (Qxc4) 37. Rd1 Rh6? (Qb7) 38. Qf7 Nh5? (Qd8) 39. Nf5? (Qf5+) Qd8 40. Rh1 Qg5 41. Nxh6 Kxh6 42. Rxh5+ Qxh5 43. Qxh5+ Kxh5 44. b4 1-0

Before completing this post an email was received from my friend Michael Mulford who, frankly, is one of the best reasons to be involved with Chess. Michael has been one of the “good” guys involved with the Royal game and has now become one of the “Great” guys.

nocaB,

Since I saw the first game live I can’t fairly take your challenge and I’m thus not copying the others. But just for the fun of it I decided to see how long the opening in the second game stayed in book. Using chess.com’s opening library I found – the whole game! And it’s just a couple days old and apparently an on-line game. So what on earth led you to select that particular game. That might make a good followup, and I suspect you plan to answer that in your story.

Since I already knew the answer, I Fritzed the games. The accuracy percentage on the first one was something like 32% for the winner and 45% for the loser. In the second game it was 62% for the winner and 26%. That’s remarkably accurate for white in an on-line game if it was a fast time control, but perhaps not so unreasonable if it was a 3 day per move game.

Feel free to use my comments when you post the answer.

Mulfish

First, I was unaware chess.com even had an opening library. As regular readers know I use the ChessBaseDataBase and 365Chess. I was also unaware a game could be “Fritzed.” At one time I had an older Fritz on my laptop, but it sputtered to death and I have no “engine” at all.

What led me to the game is that I played the Closed Sicilian “back in the day” and have actually had the position from the Gunina vs Harika after seven moves on a board during a regulation USCF rated tournament several times. I invariably played 8 a3, so 8 h3 looks really weird. I do not even want to contemplate what IM Boris Kogan would have said, or how he would have looked, if I had produced played such a weak move.

As for the second game, Siddeley vs Osinaga, I was attracted to the tournament because I am currently reading a new book, which will soon be reviewed, Duchamp’s Pipe: A Chess Romance–Marcel Duchamp and George Koltanowski, by Celia Rabinovitch, which is difficult to put down. Unfortunately the games from the tournament could not be found at Mark Crowther’s unbelievably excellent The Week In Chess. I prefer TWIC because there is no engine analysis to cloud my judgement. I mean, what’s the point of watching a Chess game being played if one is spoon-fed? Therefore, I watched the games at the Bomb, where even if one covers the analysis one can still see the colorful moves as they are displayed onscreen. The thing I liked is that I was unfamiliar with most of the combatants and therefore had no idea what the opponents were rated. I decided to keep it that way until the tournament ended, giving me as an objective mind as possible. I made an attempt to ascertain the rating of each player during the tournament, which was made somewhat easier by the colorful moves. I suppose there were many games I could have used for contrast, but the aforementioned game just happened to be the one used. As an example, what do you think the players who produced this opening were rated?

1 e4 Nf6 2 Nf3 d6 3 Bb5+ Bd7 4 Bxd7+ Qxd7 5 O-O c5

The games were played during the late afternoon into the evening in Atlanta, which was real nice. Until the last round, which was today. I was shocked, SHOCKED to discover the games were concluding when I checked earlier today. A sickening feeling came over me as I railed against stupidity of the organizers who would hold a tournament with every round beginning later in the day except the final round. Chess players get into a routine and are thrown out of it by Fools In Power! I digress…After the penultimate round I decided to surf on over to Chess-Results.com and learn the ratings of the players before watching the last round.

As for the opening…Believe it or not this game was played in the sixth round by GM Gilberto Hernandez Guerrero 2557 vs GM Neuris Delgado Ramirez 2634. You can look it up…(https://www.chessbomb.com/arena/2020-duchamp-cup/06-Hernandez_Guerrero_Gilberto-Delgado_Ramirez_Neuris)

I give the full game because I want to show a position deriving from the endgame analysis by Stockfish:

1. e4 Nf6 2. Nf3 d6 3. Bb5+ Bd7 4. Bxd7+ Qxd7 5. O-O c5 6. Re1 Nc6 7. c3 e6 8. d4 cxd4 9. cxd4 d5 10. e5 Ng8 11. b3 h5 12. Ba3 Bxa3 13. Nxa3 Nge7 14. Qd2 Nf5 15. Rac1 Qe7 16. Nc2 O-O 17. g3 Rfc8 18. Kg2 Rc7 19. Ne3 Nxe3+ 20. Rxe3 a5 21. Rec3 Rac8 22. h4 Nb4 23. Rxc7 Rxc7 24. Rxc7 Qxc7 25. a3 Nc2 26. a4 (26. Qg5 Nxa3 27. Qxh5 Qc2 28. Qg5 Qc7 29. h5 Kh7 30. g4 Nb5 31. Qf4 Nc3 32. Ng5+ Kg8 33. Qe3 Ne4 34. Nxe4 dxe4 35. Qxe4 Qc3 36. Qe3 Qxe3 37. fxe3 b5 38. e4 a4 39. bxa4 bxa4 40. d5 a3 41. d6)

Nb4 27. Kf1 Qc2 28. Qxc2 Nxc2 ½-½

 

 

 

 

 

Impossible Mission

Your mission, should you decide to accept,

is to play over the two following games in order to discern which game was played between titled players or between class players with a rating beginning with the number “1”.

1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. g3 g6 4. Bg2 Bg7 5. d3 d6 6. Be3 Rb8 7. Qd2 b5 8. h3 b4 9. Nd1 Bd7 10. f4 e6 11. Nf3 Nge7 12. h4 Nd4 13. h5 Ba4 14. Rc1 Nec6 15. Nxd4 cxd4 16. Bf2 Qa5 17. g4 Bb5 18. h6 Bf6 19. g5 Bd8 20. b3 Rc8 21. O-O O-O 22. Bg3 Qxa2 23. f5 Be7 24. Bh3 exf5 25. exf5 Ra8 26. Nf2 Ne5 27. Ne4 Bxd3 28. Bxe5 Bxe4 29. Bxd4 Qa5 30. Qe3 d5 31. fxg6 hxg6 32. h7+ Kxh7 33. Be6 Bxg5 34. Qxg5 Qd8 35. Bf6 Qb6+ 36. Rf2 fxe6 37. Qh4+ Kg8 38. Qh8+ 1-0

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 e5 5. Bb5+ Bd7 6. Bxd7+ Qxd7 7. Ne2 h6 8. Nbc3 Nf6 9. Ng3 Be7 10. Nh5 O-O 11. Nxf6+ Bxf6 12. Nd5 Bd8 13. g4 Bh4 14. Be3 Na6 15. Rg1 f6 16. Qd2 Bg5 17. O-O-O Qa4 18. Nc3 Bxe3 19. Qxe3 Qb4 20. h4 Qc5 21. Qg3 Rf7 22. Rd2 Nc7 23. g5 fxg5 24. hxg5 hxg5 25. Qxg5 Ne6 26. Qg6 Re8 27. Rh1 Nf4 28. Rh8+ Kxh8 29. Qxf7 Re6 30. Qxb7 Rh6 31. Nd1 Qa5 32. a3 Qc5 33. Kb1 a5 34. Ne3 Kh7 35. Qf7 Rf6 36. Qc4 Qb6 37. Rd1 Rh6 38. Qf7 Nh5 39. Nf5 Qd8 40. Rh1 Qg5 41. Nxh6 Kxh6 42. Rxh5+ Qxh5 43. Qxh5+ Kxh5 44. b4 1-0

Answer tomorrow…

 

Nutritionist Sans Cool Clear Water For A Year

Woman Hasn’t Drunk Water in a Year, Claims It Made Her Healthier

A nutritionist who claims to not have consumed any water for a year has sparked controversy online by suggesting that her long-term dry fast has greatly improved her health and well-being.

35-year-old Sophie Partik

used to suffer aching joints, puffy eyes, food allergies, bad skin and digestive issues, but claims that all these problems went away when she started dry-fasting. She doesn’t touch any liquids for 13-14 hours a day, and when she does it’s only living water, like the juice of fruits and vegetables. The most she has gone without any liquids was 52 hours, but she dreams of the day when she will be able to dry fast for 10 days. Sophie hasn’t drunk bottled or faucet water in a year, and claims that the need for water is only in our heads.

Woman Hasn’t Drunk Water in a Year, Claims It Made Her Healthier

 

“You’re not sick; you’re thirsty. Don’t treat thirst with medication.”Dr. F. Batmanghelidj

Our life, our planet. Over 70% of the earth’s surface is water. However, most of it—98%–is salt water. Only 2% of the earth’s H20 is fresh water that we can drink, and of this, almost all is trapped in frozen glaciers.

You are not just what you eat; you are what you drink.

This is why water is so important to your health.

http://www.watercure.com/

Dr. Fereydoon Batmanghelidj

Biography:

Fereydoon Batmanghelidj, M.D. received his medical education and training at St. Mary’s Hospital Medical School of London University. He has spent most of his scientific life researching the link between pain and disease and chronic dehydration. Dr. Batmanghelidj discovered the healing powers of water 21 years ago when he was serving time as a political prisoner in an Iranian jail. He successfully treated 3,000 fellow prisoners suffering from stress-induced peptic ulcer disease with the only medication he possessed -water. This is when he understood for the first time in medical history that the body indicates its water shortage by producing pain. Since his prison experience, he has focused his full-time attention on dehydration-produced health problems in the body. His discovery has helped hundreds of thousands of people suffering from a variety of pains and degenerative diseases regain their health.

https://www.coasttocoastam.com/guest/Batmanghelidj-Dr.-Fereydoon/6049

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ms Spaceman

 

Mr. Spaceman

The Byrds

Produced by Allen Stanton
Album Fifth Dimension

Woke up this morning with light in my eyes
And then realized it was still dark outside
It was a light comin’ down from the sky
I don’t know who or why

Must be those strangers that come every night
Whose saucers shaped lights put people up tight
Leave blue green footprints that glow in the dark
I hope they get home all right

Hey Mr. Spaceman, won’t you please take me along
I won’t do anything wrong
Hey Mr. Spaceman, won’t you please take me along
For a ride

Woke up this mornin’, I was feeling quite weird
Had flies in my beard, my tooth paste was smeared
Over my window, they’d written my name
Said: “So long, we’ll see you again”

Hey Mr. Spaceman, won’t you please take me along
I won’t do anything wrong
Hey Mr. Spaceman, won’t you please take me along
For a ride

Hey Mr. Spaceman, won’t you please take me along
I won’t do anything wrong
Hey Mr. Spaceman, won’t you please take me along
For a ride

https://genius.com/The-byrds-mr-spaceman-lyrics

Vlastimil Hort Remembers Tony Miles

I have a bad back and it has flared up this week, making it difficult to sit for any period of time. This happened about the time I noticed a picture, which brought back memories at, Chessbase, in an article, Hort stories: Wrong place wrong time (https://en.chessbase.com/post/hort-stories-wrong-place-wrong-time) which is the second part of
Hort stories: Remembering Tony Miles, by Vlastimil Hort. (https://en.chessbase.com/post/vlastimil-hort-remembers-tony-miles)

The picture of Tony Miles lying flat while playing Ljubomir Ljubojevic, “…who played lying down, suffering from back pain, caused a stir — and not only in the chess world.”

An unusual position | Photo: Persbureau van Eindhoven

Tony won that game, and the other game versus Ljubo, which helped him to finish in a three way tie for first place at Tilburg in 1985 with Robert Huebner and Victor Korchnoi.

“This time the German grandmaster protested against GM Miles playing the tournament on a stretcher. During the tournament Anthony Miles suffered back pain; therefore he played some of his games lying down on a massage table.”

“Many participants of the tournament protested in their own unique way. When GM Dzindzichashvili played his game vs. Miles, he spent the whole game standing in front of the British grandmaster. GM Ljubojevic used a different approach. He was sitting the whole game; however, he was sitting at a totally separate table from the one where Miles played their game!”

GM Robert Huebner decided to play a prearranged draw where his moves would look ridiculous. When Miles learned about Huebner’s idea, he said, “I’ll play sensible moves, you play what you like, and I’ll offer a draw on move five.”

“And that’s how that outlandish game was born.” (https://www.chess.com/article/view/when-chess-players-protest)

The article also contains one of the most famous Chess games of my half century of Chess, the game Tony won against the current World Chess Champion, Anatoly Karpov.

Hort writes: “His most famous game will probably remain the one against Karpov in 1980 in Skara, Sweden. Miles defeated the World Champion with the extravagant move 1…a6?! and proved that even the “Soviet giants” could be beaten.”

The sensational win against Karpov with 1…a6 in the 1980 European Team Championship | Photo: “It’s only me”

If you are unfamiliar with the game please do yourself a favor and click on over to Chessbase and enjoy. You can thank me later…

 

 

 

 

 

GM Adhiban Baskaran Forfeited For Wearing A Watch

The title of a new article at Chessbase is:

A forfeit for wearing an analogue watch?

by Shahid Ahmed

2/9/2020

At the 40th National Team Open, a big shock in round three when GM Adhiban Baskaran

Adhiban is the first GM casualty in India of the analog watch rule | Photo: Gopakumar Sudhakaran

was forfeited on board one for possessing an analogue watch

after 16 moves against IM C R G Krishna. His team still won the match, thanks to wins on the lower boards. It’s an unusual case, though evidently all according to the tournament rules.

Please surf on over to Chessbase and read the entire story. https://en.chessbase.com/post/adhiban-loses-for-possessing-analog-watch-in-national-teams-2020

A recent article caught my attention causing me to reflect upon an earlier article concerning the future of the contact lens and what the future of technology holds for the antiquated Royal game.

The Display of the Future Might Be in Your Contact Lens

Mojo Vision’s prototypes can enhance your vision or show you your schedule—right from the surface of your eyes.

Courtesy of Mojo Vision

A glance to the left. A flick to the right. As my eyes flitted around the room, I moved through a virtual interface only visible to me—scrolling through a calendar, looking up commute times home, and even controlling music playback. It’s all I theoretically need to do to use Mojo Lens, a smart contact lens coming from a company called Mojo Vision.

The California-based company, which has been quiet about what it’s been working on for five years, has finally shared its plan for the world’s “first true smart contact lens.” But let’s be clear: This is not a product you’ll see on store shelves next autumn. It’s in the research and development phase—a few years away from becoming a real product.

A Future with Less Screens

Mojo Vision is all about “invisible computing.” The company, whose founders include industry veterans from the likes of Apple, Google, Amazon, and Microsoft, wants to reduce our reliance on screens. Instead of pulling out your phone to check why it buzzed in the middle of a conversation, look to the corner of your eye to activate an interface that will tell you in a split second.

“We want to create a technology that lets you be you, lets you look like you; doesn’t change your appearance; it doesn’t make you act weird walking down the street,” said Mike Wiemer, cofounder and chief technology officer at Mojo Vision. “It’s very discreet and frankly, substantially, most of the time it doesn’t show you anything.”

https://www.wired.com/story/mojo-vision-smart-contact-lens/

What will it mean for the Royal game when these contact lens become ubiquitous? As I have heard all my life, “You cannot stop progress.”

Smart contacts: The future of the wearable you won’t even see

One day, contact lenses could do much more than just correct our vision
Google

The notion of wearing lenses over our eyes to correct our vision dates back hundreds of years, with some even crediting Leonardo da Vinci as one of the first proponents of the idea (though that remains somewhat controversial). Material science and our understanding of the human eye have come a long way since, while their purpose has remained largely the same. In the age of wearable computers, however, scientists in the laboratories of DARPA, Google, and universities around the world see contact lenses not just as tools to improve our vision, but as opportunities to augment the human experience. But how? And why?

As a soft, transparent disc of plastic and silicone that you wear on your eyeball, a contact lens may seem like a very bad place to put electronics. But if you look beneath the surface, the idea of a smart contact lens has real merit, and that begins with its potential to improve our well-being.

Google has explored the idea of a glucose-monitoring contact lens
Google

Power of the eye

Professor Jean-Louis de Bougrenet de la Tocnaye with his battery-packing contact lens
IMT Atlantique

In France, Professor Jean-Louis de Bougrenet de la Tocnaye leads an optical research team at IMT Atlantique, a technology university in Brest Nantes and Rennes. The scientists are working on a new generation of optical devices that could perform some exciting functions. A big one is the ability to detect the precise direction of a user’s gaze, which could lead to assistive technologies for everything from driving, to surgical procedures to augmented reality systems that don’t require goggles and helmets.

“It is clear that if we have complex electronics and computing tasks to incorporate into the contact lens, it would be necessary to have a battery to make that lens autonomous, and it had never been done,” de Bougrenet de la Tocnaye tells New Atlas.

Until 2019, that is. In April, he and the team unveiled a prototype of a device that will be central to its aims, the world’s first standalone contact lens with a battery inside. As a demonstration of what it could do, the team used the onboard battery to power an LED for a few hours, but they expect things to go a whole lot further than that.

“The efficiency of the battery will depend on the thickness and the surface area,” explains de Bougrenet de la Tocnaye. “We can’t put something over the iris completely, so the battery at the moment is a kind of ring around it. But of course, in the future you’ll also want to cover the pupil part, and in that case the battery should be transparent. This will become possible through the use of graphene technology to make electronics transparent.”

A standalone contact lens with an onboard power supply could serve all kinds uses
IMT Atlantique

Coming to an eye near you?

Secretive augmented reality startup Magic Leap filed a patent for a smart contact lens in 2015. Sony, which launched its augmented reality smart glasses for developers back in 2015, filed a patent for a contact lens that records what you see in 2016.

In the same year, Samsung applied for a patent for a contact lens with a built-in camera, and then generated headlines again this August when it was granted a patent for a contact lens capable of recording video and taking photos, potentially just through blinking.

And these are just the projects we know about, working on what we consider to be possible today. Give it another decade of progress in material science and miniaturized electronics, and who knows what the humble contact lens will be capable of?

“We are just at the beginning, says de Bougrenet de la Tocnaye. “It is very difficult to answer what we will be able to do, because we are just discovering what the capabilities are. The technology is there and we can really integrate a lot of things into a contact lens, and also into a patch on the skin. In the future, the human being will really get ahead with these kinds of sensors and devices on the body.”

https://newatlas.com/wearables/contact-lens-future-wearable-augmented-reality/

It is more than a little obvious that Chess, as it has been known for the last couple of centuries, must either change, or die. It is inevitable humans of the future will live in some kind of “mind-meld” with technology. The only humans still playing Chess in the future without technology will be akin to the humans seen battling robots in dystopian Sci-Fi movies.

“The technology is there and we can really integrate a lot of things into a contact lens, and also into a patch on the skin. In the future, the human being will really get ahead with these kinds of sensors and devices on the body.”

“Give it another decade of progress in material science and miniaturized electronics, and who knows what the humble contact lens will be capable of?”

What will the Chess world do? (I first typed “FIDE” but after laughing, decided to type “Chess world”)

It may be that with costly technology tournament directors and officials will be able to detect a “loaded” contact lens, but what about that “patch on the skin”? Even naked Chess would not stop a human with technology contained in a patch of skin. There is technology now that can detect technology on a person, and maybe in a person. But what if everyone has technology within? Maybe in the future society will be divided into human hybrid’s 

and those without, who we will call the “natural’s.”

Which group do you think will be playing Chess?

Now is the time for Chess people to discuss how to adjust to the future. While laughing I thought, “Who am I kidding. The dysfunctional FIDE is still trying to cope with the use of large objects used to cheat, such as a cell phone.”

Music for Cyborgs

by Medulasa

https://medulasa.bandcamp.com/album/music-for-cyborgs

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-mK3YJfFDnAJNMSgfhdUwg/videos

 

 

 

 

What Is Chess?

Having a little time recently a book within reach, Soviet Chess Strategy,

by Alexey Suetin, was opened. The first chapter begins: “The game of chess has many facets. Its attraction lies above all in the inner beauty of its ideas – its aesthetics. At the same time the laws of logic are applicable to it – which is what constitutes its affinity with science. The development of creative thought in chess, especially since the Renaissance era, vividly demonstrates that chess is and inseparable part of world culture.”

There has been a movement recently by some people of the Chess world attempting to have the Royal game thought of as a “sport” which is one of the most ridiculous and absurd ideas contemplated in fifty years of being involved with the GAME of Chess.

I put the book down and picked up a recent copy of the best Chess magazine in the universe, New In Chess, and again read, “Lately I have been feeling that chess is not a sport. It’s more like an art, a social occasion; it’s a game. And there is a big difference between sport and a game. Football is a game, but it’s mostly sport. You’re for somebody, you love some team, you want them to win. I don’t see chess this way. It’s more of a social thing, an intellectual thing. All this competitiveness at the top level, which has always been there – who is first in the rankings – I am not particularly interested in this aspect. For me it’s much more important to hang out with the guys, because they are very interesting people. I like being around chess players. That’s my motivation for the tournament.” – Ilya Levitov, In The Spirit Of Amber in Amsterdam, New In Chess 2019 #6

According to the Business Standard News Ilya Levitov is a Russian billionaire. He is also one of the authors of the magnificent book From London to Elista.

Exclusive interview of Ilya Levitov

I agree with the Russian “…that chess is not a sport.” Golf is a sport, but also a game. People who play golf greet each other with, “How’s your golf game?” Football is a game. I have never heard anyone at any time say, “We are going to the football sport,” for example, but I have heard, “We are going to the football game.” The reason those two examples are considered both sport and game is because there is physical activity involved with playing a sport. No game in which a human sits for hours at a time will ever be classified as a “sport.”

I decided to do a search with startpage.com to learn what is being said pertaining to what is Chess, but first headed to the dictionary:

Definition of chess

(Entry 1 of 2)
: a game for 2 players each of whom moves 16 pieces according to fixed rules across a checkerboard and tries to checkmate the opponent’s king
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/chess

chess

a game played on a chessboard by two people who maneuver sixteen pieces each according to rules governing movement of the six kinds of pieces (pawn, rook, knight, bishop, queen, king), the object being to bring the opponent’s king into checkmate.
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/chess

Then I surfed on over to the Urban Dictionary:

Top definition
chess
A game where if you lose you think the person who beat you must be an extremely intelligent person. And if you win you think you’re the best player ever.
I just won at chess; I could probably beat Bobby Fischer now.
by runandwin January 01, 2005.

2
Chess
A game where the objective is to violently throw your pieces to the floor upon losing.
Chess is being ruined by computer play.
by rocketman77049 December 06, 2009

3
chess
an extremely challenging, complex game that heightens your skills to think ahead. there are more rules than can be put into a book and it’s usually played by intellectuals, though not all of them can be considered “geeks”, some are hot.
Chess is commonly misconcieved to be boring or stupid.
by melthana April 17, 2010

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=chess

Life: A Game of Chess
Posted on March 21, 2017 by Brady Moller

Life is one big chessboard. People are the chess pieces.

Chess is a strategy board game where all pieces on the board can move in different positions and each with different limitations. All pieces on the chessboard are moved to strategically over power the opponent’s King and this is how the players ultimately win the game.

Chess, the game of life, is a game where every decision made has an impact on the rest of your game. One bad move and your entire game is ruined or in the least, it makes it hard to recover from that bad choice.

Life: A Game of Chess

Chess has been called a game of war. Check out this article:

Has chess got anything to do with war?

Napoleon and his marshals rendered as chess pieces in a jewelled Russian set

https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-32542306

Many have claimed the Royal game can be detrimental to the human brain.

Beware, Playing Lots of Chess Will Shrink Your Brain!

by Christian Jarrett

The idea that localised brain shrinkage isn’t necessarily bad is brought home wonderfully by a new brain scanning study of elite chess players. Jürgen Hänggi took structural MRI scans and diffusion tensor imaging scans of 20 male expert players (including three grandmasters and seven international masters) and compared them with 20 male inexpert players. This is only the second study ever to look at the structural brain differences characteristic of elite chess players, and the first ever to also include a measure of white matter tracts (provided by the diffusion tensor scans).

So, did the elite chess players have huge bulbous temporal lobes for remembering all those chess formations? Did they have massively engorged frontal gyri for considering multiple moves at once? Actually no. There were few structural brain differences between the elite and non-elite players, and those differences that were observed all pointed in the same direction – to localised shrinkage in the brains of the grandmasters and their ilk.

Specifically, the elite players showed reduced grey matter volume in the occipital-temporal junction (OTJ; where the occipital lobe at the back of the head, and the temporal lobes at the side of the head, meet). The OTJ is known to be involved in representing objects and their relations to each other. Elite players also showed reduced “diffusivity” in parts of the superior longitudinal fasciculus. This is a major communication tract in the brain, sending information from visual areas to executive areas. Diffusivity is a technical word for “bushiness”, so elite players showed more pruning along this major communication pathway. Also, the more years experience a player had, the smaller their caudate nucleus volume tended to be (the caudate has many functions, among them decision making).
https://www.wired.com/2014/10/beware-playing-lots-chess-will-shrink-brain/

The fact that playing Chess will make your brain shrink does not sound like a good selling point for the Royal game but maybe if brain shrinkage is actually a good thing it will change the assessment. Then again, maybe not…

How Chess Players’ Brains Are Different From Everybody Else’s

By Ellie Kaufman

Studies show that the brains of people who play chess are significantly different than an average brain. For example, grandmaster chess players have more activity in their frontal and parietal cortices, areas of the brain that focus on problem-solving and recognition.

2. Chess can shrink your brain — which is actually a good thing.

In a study where researchers scanned the brains of elite chess players, they found that these players actually had smaller brains than the non-elite players — and that’s not a bad thing. As Christian Jarrett writes in Wired, their research suggests that areas of brain shrinkage “can be a sign of neural efficiency and a reflection of behavioral expertise” as opposed to a negative result. Bigger is not always better.

https://www.mic.com/articles/119332/how-chess-players-brains-are-different-from-everybody-else-s

Brain Song

Chess Non-Players Wearing Maggie’s Drawers

GM Alexander Motylev, the top seeded player, deservedly finished tied for second place in a large, eight player group hug at the recently completed Portugal Open, only one half-point behind the winner, GM Karen H. Grigoryan. After winning his first two games against much lower rated players, Mustafa Atakay, only rated 1886, representing the USA, and IM Rafael Rodriguez Lopez of Spain, rated only 2212, Motylev faced IM Ismael Alshameary Puente, rated 2385, also from Spain. Before the opening had been completed the game ended in a perpetual check after move fifteen. As it turned out Motylev could have used the extra half point. Under ordinary circumstances Motylev would have had Mustafa for lunch, even playing with the black pieces. Motylev, as the notes will show, made no attempt to win. THAT IS THE PROBLEM WITH CHESS! Motylev, and all the other players wearing short drawers, have ruined the Royal game. If a guy like yours truly, who has been playing Chess for half a century now has lost interest in the game because of the proliferation of draws, Chess has a MAJOR PROBLEM! The fact is that there is no incentive for players to strive for a win, so they will continue to embarrass Caissa, and themselves, until Chess is consigned to the dust bin of history.

What if a player received on 1/4 point for a draw? How many GMs would be looking for an opportunity to finagle an early draw?

If a game is decisive the two players combined receive ONE POINT. If the game is drawn the two players receive ONE POINT. If the two drawers receive only one quarter of a point the total number of points awarded to the two drawers is ONE HALF POINT! One half point is one half of the one point awarded to the two players who played a decisive game, which is the way it should be. It is way past time to change the rule because if this is not done IMMEDIATELY, Chess will die a slow death, but it will, nevertheless, be dead’ern HELL.

Because of my interest in Go I have learned of several tournaments in which children were offered the choice of Chess or Go. I have been informed the vast majority of children who have done this much prefer Go because, unlike Chess, there is always a winner. If anyone reading this doubts what I write all you have to do is to teach both games to children and then ask them which one they prefer to play. It’s that simple. Chess people want nothing to do with the idea, but people of the Go community are up for the challenge.

IM Ismael Alshameary Puente (2385)

vs GM Alexander Motylev (2640)

Portugal Open 2020 round 03

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 Be7 5. Bg5 O-O 6. e3 Nbd7 7. Qc2 h6 8. Bh4 c6 9. Rd1 a6 10. a3 b5 11. c5 Re8 12. Bg3 Nh5 13. Be5 Nhf6 14. Bg3 Nh5 15. Be5 Nhf6 ½-½

1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 e6 3 Nf3 d5 4 Nc3 Be7 (SF 10 @depth 58 plays 4…Bb4; Komodo @depth 43 prefers 4…c5) 5. Bg5 (Although the most often played move, Stockfish and Houdini show 5 Bf4) 5…O-O (In order of games played at the venerable ChessBaseDataBase 5…h6, Komodo’s move, is the leader with 6037 games, followed by the move in the game, castles, showing 5607 games. Stockfish advocates 5…Nbd7, which has been played in 1331 games) 6 e3 (This move, the choice of Komodo, has been played about nine times as often as any other move. With 6428 games played it dwarfs the second most played move, 6 Qc2, which shows only 471 games. SF 10 would play 6 Rc1, a move having been played in only 112 thus far. After this post expect that to change! Insert smiley face here…) 6…Nbd7 (The most often played move, but is it the best? SF 10 @depth 42 plays 6…h6, as does Komodo 13.1 @depth 45, but the same engine @depth 42 plays the seldom played 6…b6) 7. Qc2 (Komodo 13.01 @depth 42 plays the game move, but Komodo 13.25 @depth 46 would play the most often played move, 7 Rc1) 7…h6 8 Bh4 c6 9 Rd1 (The most often played move, but Komodo 13.2 @depth 42 plays 9 a3) 9…a6 (The programs prefer 9…b6) 10. a3 (By far the most often played move but SF 090519 @depth 29 plays 10 Bd3. Komodo 10.2 @depth 28 plays 10 Be2) 10…b5 (The machines prefer 10…b6) 11. c5 Re8 (SF & Houey play 11…Nh5)
12. Bg3 (The Fish & the Dragon both play 12 Bd3) 12…Nh5 13. Be5 Nhf6 (SF plays 13…f6) 14. Bg3 Nh5 15. Be5 Nhf6 ½-½

Mark Van der Werf (2423) vs Rick Duijker (2222)

NED-ch open 07/25/2003

D11 Queen’s Gambit Declined Slav, 3.Nf3

1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 c6 3.c4 e6 4.Qc2 Nf6 5.Bg5 Be7 6.e3 O-O 7.Nc3 Nbd7 8.Rd1 a6 9.a3 h6 10.Bh4 b5 11.c5 Re8 12.b4 e5 13.dxe5 Ng4 14.Bg3 Bf8 15.Nd4 Ngxe5 16.Be2 Qf6 17.O-O Nc4 18.Bxc4 bxc4 19.e4 Bb7 20.f4 Nxc5 21.e5 Qd8 22.bxc5 Bxc5 23.Bf2 Bxa3 24.Rb1 Qc7 25.Nce2 c5 26.Nf5 d4 27.Qxc4 Qc6 28.Rxb7 Qxb7 29.Nd6 Qd7 30.Nxe8 Qxe8 31.Qb3 Bb4 32.Nxd4 a5 33.Nf5 Qe6 34.Qf3 Ra7 35.Nd6 a4 36.Qc6 a3 37.Bxc5 1-0
https://www.365chess.com/game.php?back=1&gid=86126&m=24

Theo D Van Scheltinga vs Johannes Van den Bosch

NED-ch10 1938

D61 Queen’s Gambit Declined, Orthodox defence, Rubinstein variation

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 d5 4.Nc3 Be7 5.Bg5 Nbd7 6.e3 O-O 7.Qc2 h6 8.Bh4 c6 9.Rd1 a6 10.a3 b5 11.c5 Re8 12.h3 e5 13.dxe5 Nh7 14.Bg3 Bxc5 15.Be2 Ng5 16.Nd4 Bxd4 17.exd4 f6 18.O-O fxe5 19.dxe5 Qb6 20.Kh1 Nc5 21.Bh5 Rf8 22.f4 Nge4 23.Nxe4 Nxe4 24.Bf2 Qc7 25.Bh4 Bf5 26.Qc1 g5 27.fxg5 hxg5 28.Be1 Qh7 29.Qxc6 Qxh5 30.Rxf5 Rxf5 31.Qxa8+ Kg7 32.Rxd5 Rf1+ 33.Kh2 Qf7 34.Rd7 Qxd7 35.Qxe4 Qf7 36.Bg3 Qe6 37.Qb7+ Kh6 38.Qe4 Kg7 39.Be1 Rf4 40.Qb7+ Kg6 41.Bg3 Rc4 42.Qf3 Qc6 43.Qxc6+ Rxc6 44.Be1 Rc2 45.Bc3 Kf5 46.Kg3 a5 47.Kf3 b4 48.axb4 Rxc3+ 49.bxc3 a4 50.b5 Kxe5 51.b6 Kd6 52.b7 Kc7 53.Kg4 a3 54.Kxg5 a2 55.g4 a1=Q 56.h4 Qxc3 57.Kg6 Qc6+ 58.Kg5 Qd7 59.h5 Qg7+ 60.Kf5 Qh6 0-1
https://www.365chess.com/game.php?back=1&gid=2666502&m=24

 

 

 

 

 

‘Mona Lisa’ made up of 330 Rubik’s cubes could sell for $166,000 at auction

Written by Aleesha Khaliq, CNN

An artist’s interpretation of Leonardo da Vinci’s “Mona Lisa” — fashioned out of hundreds of Rubik’s cubes — is expected to reach up to $166,000 when it goes under the hammer at a Paris auction later this month.
The artwork, made up of 330 of the famous toy cubes, is the creation of French street artist Invader, whose true identity is hidden behind a mask. It will go under the hammer at Paris’ Artcurial auction house on February 23.
“Rubik Mona Lisa” was created in 2005 and is being billed as a “modern take on the world’s most famous painting.”
The original was painted by Leonardo more than 500 years ago and hangs at the Louvre in Paris, where it is the most visited piece of art in the world.

Invader began exploring the use of Rubik’s Cubes in artwork in 2004.
It was the first time, the auction house said in a press release, that the best-selling toys were used to make art. The practice has been called “Rubikcubism.”
“Amongst his works on this theme, which he has explored in a variety of forms, this rubikcubist Mona Lisa is actually the representation that is most faithful to the original,” the auction house said in a statement.

Invader defines himself as a UFA (Unidentified Free Artist). He writes on his website that “little by little” he explores international heavily populated urban areas and “invades” them, aiming to display 20 to 50 pieces per city.

The auction house quotes him as saying in 2007 in regard to Rubikcubism: “To view a piece, you have to stand back from it. Close up, the image is nothing but a mass of cubes and colors, it’s only when you stand back that the face emerges.”
“The further away you stand, the clearer it becomes.”

https://www.cnn.com/style/article/mona-lisa-rubiks-cube-intl-scli/index.html