No one as of yet proved that the game of chess ends always in a draw by two perfect players. — MathematicalPhysicist
In any sufficiently complex game, given enough iterations, it can be demonstrated that both players become hyper-rational, and thus a winning strategy cannot be entertained.
Analogously, think about chess for a moment. Given that chess is the oldest game in human history, and given that it is deterministic, then through enough iterations it can be demonstrated that both players, given a sufficiently long backlog of past historical games, are going to face situations where winning becomes... impossible.
What is left to entertain is simply a mistake committed by either player to ensure victory. Since both players, given enough iterations, become hyper-rational, then winning becomes impossible, and the game looses its "fun-factor".
I believe the analogy can be demonstrated for ANY deterministic game, and thus, game theory has been refuted for any deterministic game.
Thoughts? — Shawn
The universe and reality is a chess board with trillions of trillions of spaces on the board. — christian2017
The universe and reality is a chess board with trillions of trillions of spaces on the board.
— christian2017
Not really. Every game is inherently deterministic. Reality seems to have an element of non-determinism in it. — Shawn
What I mean is that OP is treating game theory as a single idea by not specifying what game theory premise he claims to have disproven. That is why I said it doesn't make any sense. — Intermittent
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.