@johncarlosbaez@mathstodon.xyz
Post #4327971
2026-08-02 10:20 UTC
@antoinechambertloir@mathstodon.xyz @Colman@mastodon.ie @zanzi@mathstodon.xyz @peterwoit@mathstodon.xyz @mc@mathstodon.xyz - two things I love about math that chess lacks: it's open-ended rather than working within a fixed set of rules (as you note), and it's cooperative rather than competitive. Taken together, these mean that the idiosyncratic visions and deep labors of individual mathematicians compound to build up an ever more fascinating body of thought.
Replies (1)
-
@fractalolivia@infosec.exchange 2026-08-02 10:29
@johncarlosbaez@mathstodon.xyz @antoinechambertloir@mathstodon.xyz @Colman@mastodon.ie @zanzi@mathstodon.xyz @peterwoit@mathstodon.xyz @mc@mathstodon.xyz I am sorry to be a stick in the mud here but chess is not a metaphor for mathematics, it literally is a mathematical object in itself. saying that chess is a bad metaphor for mathematics is much like saying that the monster group is a bad metaphor for mathematics. rather, and more positively, I would suggest that chess is a rather small fragment of mathematics, making it perhaps possible to get modest insight into how mathematics works by studying it.