Look, I believe a modern chess program can beat a GM; they regularly do so.
Nowadays, that has become a widely known fact, not a believe any more...
My point is simple : an AI without a database library will not be able to beat a GM consistently.
That can not be true nor be proven in anyway.
Let me put it to you this way - a modern computer a with say 8 Gig memory can probably store database which would include every published game match in the last 20 years as well as an opening library.
BS!
1. An openning library stores only states which are considered as within the scope of chess openning, it does not store all steps of the whole match.
2. Bigger memory only serves a bigger buffer to load openning library content. Again it is a matter for better performance. With bigger content is loaded, the program can therefore match faster against states stored in the library
i.e. Bigger memory helps to speed up seek action, but keep increasing memory size will soon become meaningless (unlike keep increasing the number of CPU cores)
My hypothesis is that a pure algorithm based chess program would not win consistently versus a GM.
Trust me, you don't need a hypothesis in this case.
This is NOT the same as saying a computer cant beat a GM, which you seem to imply that I am saying.
I am not impying that way.
My point is:
1. It is technically possible now for a computer program (a good one) to keep winning a human GM without openning library.
2. If program A always beats a human GM, it can beat him even faster (it takes less time for openning moves) with a openning library.
3. So, the different of having an openning library is to beat a human GM with less time or more time. That it is.
The most important fact I want to point out is, if a program has relatively weak algorithm (which is used after openning stage), it will always loss to a human GM regardless of how good its openning library and how well it can use the library.
No offence, you simply don't know the architecture of computer chess software and have a wrong idea of the role of openning library in that matter, that then cause you to keep on saying it is damn important.
In brief, (allow me to repeat):
You have over-emphasize the openning library of a chess program.