[Retros] Again about En Passant Chess

[peufe at tin.it]

> I don't think this visualization works, because the opponent may

> have a choice of which billiard ball to activate, and indeed

> may choose to activate none if the opponent's piece stopped

> short of its target (1 d3 g6 2 Qb3 Ba6 3 Q-->f7: maybe Black

> starts the Ba6-ball rolling, but then decides not to if the Queen

> stops at e6.)

> Right, as with Orphans and more complicated recursive rules.

> It is not immediately clear to me whether and how easily

> a paradox might arise.

>

> A nice aspect of your rule that I didn't notice before is that

> it incorporates the rule forbidding a King from moving through check

> when castling!


Hi Noam,
you are right: no paradoxes.
The only one could arise if we allow to a piece being captured
to capture the piece is just going to capture it before that happen!
If so, who will be captured?
Again I think that a model could  help us in finding final
En Passant Chess rules.
No Laser action, No billiard balls, but just Time travel Machines.
At the end of the opponent move, the other one can decide to
make a live move or to activate a short step (just 1 step) Time machine and
make a move in the while the opponent was moving, taking en passant.
What else?
In this view restoring pieces would be logical, non restoring paradoxical.
But, what we have to do with Knight rules?
It just flights when it moves, so it could'nt be captured en passant.Right?
Anyway, when you'll compose the first En Passant Chess problem,
I'll glad to enjoy it.
Bye,
Franco Fedeli
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.pairlist.net/pipermail/retros/attachments/20070325/0ff71d11/attachment.htm>