### Quiescence

How do we know if we have reached the end of a specific branch? When we reach quiescence. When there are no captures and no threats anymore in that specific line.

In real chess we talk about the evaluation of a position after quiescence has been reached. But we are not talking about real chess here. We are talking about tactics, and the outcome of a puzzle will always be definite.

Let's have a look at the same position. What can we discover about the end of a branch.

 White to move

3r2k1/5p2/1p5p/p1qb4/5R2/P1N1p1P1/1P2P2P/2Q3K1 w - - 1 1

[solution]

The target is the black king. The most obvious point of pressure is g4. So let's suppose
1. Rg4+ Kf8 is there any capture or threat left against the king?
2. Rg8+ is simply taken, and another attacker against the king isn't around.
So the black king is of the hook. It is not a viable target.

Up to the next target.

We definitely can prune a branch, based on the fact that there are no  more captures and threats against a specific target.. For simplicity, I treat a check as a threat. After all, I promised to pamper My System II.

UPDATE
Do you see what I try to accomplish? By closing an open end, I relieve the pressure on the Short Term Memory. Under pressure my system II functions like a moron.

By dismissing the king as a viable target, my system II no longer needs to worry about it.

There are already a few telltale signs that the line is a dead end. For the king to be a viable target it must either be immobile or be a part of a duo attack. Since the point of pressure g4 is in contact with neither, it can be dismissed.

Of course it can be necessary to reopen a closed line later on. Branches can interfere with each other. The king of a closed branch might be chased into the point of pressure of another branch. I hope to find out the rules that govern interference between branches later on. For now, it suffices to dismiss the line as being not viable.

When my system II is overwhelmed, it acts like a moron. That's why I abandoned chess a few years ago. It doesn't make sense to continue to play chess like a moron.  In normal life I'm not too stupid, at least that is what I prefer to believe. But when I play chess, my intelligence is not a shadow of what it is usually. System I is designed to work its magic in a perfect way. System I supports system II in what it is doing. Thanks to system I, I'm a perfect moron. We are still talking about chess, btw.

To make system II work on a reasonable level, I must get rid of everything it is distracted by. More specific, I must get rid of the administration that accompanies the tree of analysis. The hypothesis I'm trying to proof is as follows:

When system II works well, i.e. it is no longer stalling due to complexity, system I will automatically follow and support system II in the best possible way. Since that is how system I is designed.

In the position above that might mean that you do not have to close the line Rg4+ manually, but that your intuition tells you immediately that it is a dead end.

I will look at the queen as target in a later post.