Code: Select all
x = 17, y = 17, rule = 235678/3456/9
7.3A$7.3A$4.HG5AGH$3.11A$2.H11AH$2.G11AG$2.13A$17A$17A$17A$2.13A$2.G
11AG$2.H11AH$3.11A$4.HG5AGH$7.3A$7.3A!
Code: Select all
x = 17, y = 17, rule = 235678/3456/9
7.3A$7.3A$4.HG5AGH$3.11A$2.H11AH$2.G11AG$2.13A$17A$17A$17A$2.13A$2.G
11AG$2.H11AH$3.11A$4.HG5AGH$7.3A$7.3A!
Code: Select all
x = 26, y = 10, rule = B2c3-i5i6ac78/S2378
12b2o10b2o$12bo12bo$12b2o10b2o5$2o9b2o11b2o$bo10bo12bo$2o9b2o11b2o!
Code: Select all
x = 2, y = 2, rule = B02345/S12
bo$o!
Code: Select all
x = 29, y = 7, rule = B2-ek4aiw5-anry6aei8/S1c2ak3eik4einwz5-cnqr6ace7
bob2obo8bo8b2ob2o$2b4o9b2obo7bo$13b2o$o6bo6bo$2bo2bo7bo5bo$bob2obo$2b
4o!
Code: Select all
x = 40, y = 9, rule = B2-ek4aiqtwz5cijq6ein/S1c2ak3eik4einwyz5eijny6-k7
o5bo5bob2obo8bo8b2ob2o$b2ob2o7b4o9b2obo7bo$2bobo19b2o$b5o5bo6bo6bo$13b
o2bo7bo5bo$3bo8bob2obo$3bo9b4o$o2bo2bo$bo3bo!
Yeah, A for Awesome defined that a while ago, it is a pretty handy term instead of writing out the description every time.77topaz wrote:By "relativistic", I assume you mean "between c/2 and c"?
That's an even vaguer term.KittyTac wrote:I often call relativistic ships "fast".
And c spaceships "very fast".77topaz wrote:That's an even vaguer term.KittyTac wrote:I often call relativistic ships "fast".
Code: Select all
#CXRLE Pos=-5,-3 Gen=565
x = 6, y = 6, rule = B3/S238:T10,10
2bo$5o$2ob3o$2o2bo$b3o$2bo!
What are above-c ships in LtL rules, then?KittyTac wrote:And c spaceships "very fast".
"Ridiculously fast".77topaz wrote:What are above-c ships in LtL rules, then?KittyTac wrote:And c spaceships "very fast".
Impossible, since -- as I pointed out before -- "speed of light" does not mean "one cell per generation", and faster-than-c ships are impossible even in LtL rules. You guys had better come up with some different terminology for that.77topaz wrote:What are above-c ships in LtL rules, then?
Well, if by "consensus" you mean that four people chimed in at all, of which two agreed we should stick to the established definition, where "c" denotes the maximum at which information can travel in a given CA, and two thought it should instead always refer to a speed of one cell per generation -- then sure!77topaz wrote:Well, in a recent discussion the consensus seemed to be to reserve the usage of "c" to mean "one cell per generation", and to use a different term, possible "relative c", to refer to the (higher) speed limit in LtL rules.
Notice something about all these speeds? Yep, they're all written using "c" to mean "one cell per generation". So, as a matter of fact, the consensus amongst people who actually investigate LtL rules does seem to be to use "c" in that way. So, your comments about "the established definition" and "what you seem to think they mean isn't what they actually mean" seem to be a bit inaccurate.
- 1224,15c/284
- 406c/148d
- 128c/88d
- 5c/2o
- 1029c/239o
- (2718614,375678)c/245714
- 3934c/148
- 3788c/669o
- 4c/2 and 12c/6
- 67c/220d
- (4327,88)c/508
- 6c/84 diagonal
- 8c/26
- 2c/10o
- 4c
- c diagonal
- C/2 d
- (19,6)c/28
Yeah, Golly itself, when using oscar, shows two cells per generation as 2c, regardless of range. If anything, c as being one cell per generation is the one that is established. Golly says this is 8c/4, with oscar:77topaz wrote:So, as a matter of fact, the consensus amongst people who actually investigate LtL rules does seem to be to use "c" in that way.
Code: Select all
x = 7, y = 7, rule = R4,C0,M1,S2..4,B7..7,NM
2ob2o$5bo$6bo$6bo$6bo$5bo$2ob2o!
I didn't intend to reply again, but there is a misunderstanding here that I'd like to address. So let me give some historical background, as I see it.AforAmpere wrote:Wikipedia says that C is one cell per generation as well, and the only spot that seems not to is the LifeWiki page that you edited to say that C is relative.
Yes, the term "speed of light" was originally defined as the speed of information, which is one cell per generation in CGoL. But in LtL, the vast majority of people use "c" in its geometrical sense of meaning one cell per generation (which is easier to visualise and consistent across different ranges), so that insisting upon the other meaning seems a bit pedantic. It's not due to "confusion on the part of those using it", it's rather used because it's more convenient, for the reasons in the previous sentence.Apple Bottom wrote:[snip]
Now, of course maybe I'm wrong, and maybe "speed of light" was meant to mean "one cell per generation" all along, no matter which CA was being considered, and the fact that this also happened to be the maximum speed at which information could be transmitted was merely a curious coincidence.
[snip]
Why is that something to complain about? A Garden of Eden is simply any pattern that contains an orphan, with possibly additional cells surrounding it.Macbi wrote:While we're on the topic, can I complain that a "Garden of Eden" is a pattern with no parents, while an "orphan" is a bounded region that can only occur in the initial state of the universe.
"Non-tot rules" or "nt rules" are sometimes used for those.Apple Bottom wrote:isotropic non-totalistic Life-like CAs (someone should really come up with a shorter moniker for these!)
Yeah, that was something I'd suggested in the other thread I linked earlier. In that thread, AforAmpere had the counterargument that C is sometimes used interchangeably with c at the moment (as is true of one of the descriptions in that list from the LtL thread). Still, I think it's a good option, as would be AforAmpere's suggestion of "RC" for "relative c".calcyman wrote:I think someone suggested uppercase C for theoretical maximum speed of information propagation, and lowercase c for cell-per-generation, which I find to be very intuitive. Does anyone have arguments against this being adopted as the unambiguous standard?
The only problem I have with that system is that C and c are currently used interchangeably. Do you think instead of capital C, maybe use RC, for relative c? I feel personally that the two need to have some sort of obvious distinction, to determine meaning more easily, without having to check for capitalization every time.calcyman wrote:I think someone suggested uppercase C for theoretical maximum speed of information propagation, and lowercase c for cell-per-generation, which I find to be very intuitive. Does anyone have arguments against this being adopted as the unambiguous standard?
Code: Select all
x = 19, y = 50, rule = B2-ik3nqr4cejntw5-ckq678/S02ain3-iknr4anry5acei678
bo3bo7bo3bo$obobobo5bobobobo$2obob2o5b2obob2o$2o3b2o5b2o3b2o$ob3obo5bo
b3obo$b5o7b5o$b5o7b5o3$8bobo$5bob5obo$4bo2b2ob2o2bo$4bobobobobobo$4b2o
2b3o2b2o$2bo2b9o2bo$b3o3b5o3b3o$3o2b9o2b3o$b17o$b17o$b17o$b17o$b17o$b
17o$b17o$b17o$b17o$b17o$b17o$b17o$b17o$b17o$b17o$b17o$b17o$b17o$b17o$b
17o$b17o$b17o$b17o$b17o$b17o$b17o$b17o$b17o$b17o$b17o$b17o$b17o$b17o!