• Zink@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        38
        ·
        15 hours ago

        This was a fun one to look up. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shannon_number

        It looks like the number of valid chess positions is in the neighborhood of 10^40 to 10^44, and the number of atoms in the Earth is around 10^50. Yeah the latter is bigger, but the former is still absolutely huge.

        Let’s assume we have a magically amazing diamond-based solid state storage system that can represent the state of a chess square by storing it in a single carbon atom. The entire board is stored in a lattice of just 64 atoms. To estimate, let’s say the total number of carbon atoms to store everything is 10^42.

        Using Avogadro’s number, we know that 6.022x10^23 atoms of carbon will weigh about 12 grams. For round numbers again, let’s say it’s just 10^24 atoms gives you 10 grams.

        That gives 10^42 / 10^24 = 10^18 quantities of 10 grams. So 10^19 grams or 10^16 kg. That is like the mass of 100 Mount Everests just in the storage medium that can store multiple bits per atom! That SSD would be the size of a small large moon!

        • lime!@feddit.nu
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          11 hours ago

          i think you did the weight approximation in the wrong order, 1024 is a lot bigger than 6×1023. so you can probably double the final weight.

          • Zink@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 hours ago

            10^24 is a lot bigger than 6×10^23

            Well yeah it’s almost double, but I wrote the comment as a mental estimation of the order of magnitude, so it doesn’t change the substance of the discussion.

            I mean at the beginning I arbitrarily picked a number in that 10^40 to 10^44 range and that’s a factor of 1:10,000 rather than 1:2, lol.

            • JackbyDev@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              3 hours ago

              Slightly less than double, actually. (Doesn’t really change the meat of the argument or anything though.)

            • lime!@feddit.nu
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 hours ago

              yeah yeah, cosmological approximations and all that, but there’s still a bit of difference between “planetoid” and “gas giant” :P

        • CrazyLikeGollum@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          13 hours ago

          Assuming your math is correct (and I have no reason to doubt that it is) a mass of 10^16 kg would actually be a pretty small moon or moderately sized asteroid. That’s actually roughly the mass of Mars’ moon Phobos (which is the 75th largest planetary moon in the Solar System).

          • Zink@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            4 hours ago

            I was thinking of 10^16kg diamond storage inside a larger SSD that’s the size of a large moon, similar to how a real SSD has data stored in tiny little slivers of silicon inside a much much larger device.

            I should have explained that one better. It’s easy to imply such details to keep text shorter.

        • PolarKraken@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          13 hours ago

          valid chess positions is in the neighborhood of 1040 to 1044

          Lol, big board you’re playing with…

          • Zink@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 hours ago

            If you don’t limit it to valid positions/arrangements it’s like 10^120. Closer to the “number of X in the observable universe” caliber of number.

            • PolarKraken@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 hours ago

              So I think I was wrong, but you are too lmao.

              10120 is the number of valid game-trees, or valid ~80 move games.

              The much smaller number I quoted above, though, IS the valid positions, I was thinking it was actually the trimmed down “truly valid” game-tree sequences.

              Isn’t math fun? Limitless ways for us to be wrong!