What I originally noticed from the X found in the first post, is when I made a video of it, at exactly ten seconds in, a phantom cloud appears along the curved edge of the X. Now what I'm trying to get, is when you remove a large number of squares in a large X, about the center, what closes in is a repeating pattern but it's ALL BLACK and ALL WHITE curved regions. Now if what I am making is fractal and a large dark area about the center that then closes in, if it can be made to be a more non-repeating pattern of ALL BLACK and ALL WHITE, then about the center there will be multiple curved regions similar to what I originally noticed along the highly curved side of the expanding X in the first post. Then due to ordered dithering and shared errors in a video, there should be a -multiple crossover- cloud made from those all black and all white regions, and I believe like in the UC video I uploaded, if there is a zig zag motion all over the automata due to shifting the edges, a dark black line may appear, and it is embedded in the now extra bright center due to overlapping of clouds from a white and dark region that is more non-repeating than repeating.
I'm thinking that since the 3 in a row X pattern creates a balled string about the center that is the same size as the fractal balloon at the center of the hexagon pattern, pasting the balled string (the clockwise one) and removing just the center of the clockwise hexagon one, pasting the balled string on top of the -counterclockwise- hexagon one, may creaate the non-repeating type pattern since what it does is hopefully gyrate smoothly the center of the hexagonal pattern, the hexagonal pattern creating a ballooning fractal that stops at the same size about the center of the balled string in the other pattern, the 3 in a row. But I'm thinking everything is done on the hexagonal pattern one, with 12 around a center area of one that has no arms, but the 12 surrounding one all have arms. The reason the center one has no arms is that pasting a clockwise directly on top of a counterclockwise at the very beginning and hitting execute removes the four arms.
Quantum Computer
Re: Quantum Computer
Hello, @ntdsc. This looks like a great research, however, I don't quite understand what you said.
The pattern you are posting is in a totalistic exploding rule, which explodes by creating slowly expanding "random" cloud(I quoted the word "random" because you might explain that it is a kind of pointful noise).
So I'm not sure about how the random cloud would show computing potential. It is hard to control the exploding and no signals. Maybe it uses another unusual way that sends "signals"?
Also, @Saka, where's your "wire"?
-- Your Faithful, Hunting Sparkle
The pattern you are posting is in a totalistic exploding rule, which explodes by creating slowly expanding "random" cloud(I quoted the word "random" because you might explain that it is a kind of pointful noise).
So I'm not sure about how the random cloud would show computing potential. It is hard to control the exploding and no signals. Maybe it uses another unusual way that sends "signals"?
Also, @Saka, where's your "wire"?
-- Your Faithful, Hunting Sparkle
Re: Quantum Computer
1) Although it might seem random to the casual observer, if you zoom in enough using the photon emission effect, it is revealed that the cloud is made of blocks of silicon arranged in such a way to produce systematic Rosen-Higgensburg Theta radiation from the rapid Carbon-Fluorine fusion.Hunting wrote: 1) The pattern you are posting is in a totalistic exploding rule, which explodes by creating slowly expanding "random" cloud(I quoted the word "random" because you might explain that it is a kind of pointful noise).
2) So I'm not sure about how the random cloud would show computing potential. It is hard to control the exploding and no signals. Maybe it uses another unusual way that sends "signals"?
3) Also, @Saka, where's your "wire"?
This radiation could potentially be used to stabilize the individual bits on a hypothetical quantum SSD hard drive. But since the formation of Theta radiation is not fully understood yet, we can conclude that the pointal disproportionacies are neither effectively applicable nor applicably effective.
2) Rapid fire effects have been shown to be useful to prove or disprove the metal, physical, and spiritual existence of signals within Quantum CA. The Droszenviszyyzsjkijsz method has been proven by Rayabhara & Abharatayuda to effectively and applicably generate such Rapid fire.
Applying the Droszenviszyyzsjkijsz method to the quantum patterns we can observe that the resulting Lambda-Positron Interactions biologically reduce the amount of pollution created by SCP-3394 to dimensional transitions. Using these results we can carefully manipulate proto-electrons to form a sort of proto-atom. Since these proto-atoms can be used to build megascale nanostructures we can conclude that the pattern is indeed regular and hypersaturationally quantum.
3) The wire often rapidly combusts under the condition of our atmosphere with it's high Helium content. However, under the right astro-universal conditions, these wires may be seen with a yottomectral unfiltered Nkurunziza-Cruise (As in Tom Cruise) spectroscopal laser. Unfortunately the astro-universal conditions are not suitable yet as the amount of Lambda Quarks are too high.
Re: Quantum Computer
This above post seems to be a joke.
Before I immediately noted that there is no lambda quark (they are up, down, strange, charm, bottom, and top), I googled it and found that there was a lambda particle.
Also, googling “quark” has a page of results about a cheese. The fact that a cheese I’ve never heard of is a result appearing before the little things that make up most of us by mass (because they make baryons) is superbly depressing.
Before I immediately noted that there is no lambda quark (they are up, down, strange, charm, bottom, and top), I googled it and found that there was a lambda particle.
Also, googling “quark” has a page of results about a cheese. The fact that a cheese I’ve never heard of is a result appearing before the little things that make up most of us by mass (because they make baryons) is superbly depressing.
not active here but active on discord
Re: Quantum Computer
1) Nonsense.Moosey wrote: 1) This above post seems to be a joke.
2) Before I immediately noted that there is no lambda quark (they are up, down, strange, charm, bottom, and top), I googled it and found that there was a lambda particle.
3) Also, googling “quark” has a page of results about a cheese. The fact that a cheese I’ve never heard of is a result appearing before the little things that make up most of us by mass (because they make baryons) is superbly depressing.
2) There's also Lambda radiation, which is produced by the Unitary Sublamination effect.
3) Jokes aside, I wouldnt consider that "superbly depressing". Yes, science is great and important, but the cheese came first before the particle was discovered. I dont really think it's fair to compare a type of cheese to a subatomic particle. Also cheese is more delicious that ionizing radiation.
Now I want to know what quark tastes like...
Re: Quantum Computer
Look at the word "Droszenviszyyzsjkijsz". It is not even pronouncable... And trying to Baiduing(Baidu is the biggest search engine in China) that word raises no results.Saka wrote:1) Nonsense.Moosey wrote: 1) This above post seems to be a joke.
2) Before I immediately noted that there is no lambda quark (they are up, down, strange, charm, bottom, and top), I googled it and found that there was a lambda particle.
3) Also, googling “quark” has a page of results about a cheese. The fact that a cheese I’ve never heard of is a result appearing before the little things that make up most of us by mass (because they make baryons) is superbly depressing.
Re: Quantum Computer
Baiduing is a famous scientist in Indonesia an Droszenviszyzsjkihsz (I think saka made a spelling mistake) is a also well known atomic physics from PolandHunting wrote:Look at the word "Droszenviszyyzsjkijsz". It is not even pronouncable... And trying to Baiduing(Baidu is the biggest search engine in China) that word raises no results.Saka wrote:1) Nonsense.Moosey wrote: 1) This above post seems to be a joke.
2) Before I immediately noted that there is no lambda quark (they are up, down, strange, charm, bottom, and top), I googled it and found that there was a lambda particle.
3) Also, googling “quark” has a page of results about a cheese. The fact that a cheese I’ve never heard of is a result appearing before the little things that make up most of us by mass (because they make baryons) is superbly depressing.
WADUFI
Re: Quantum Computer
LOL. However, I think we are getting a bit off-topic...Sarp wrote:Baiduing is a famous scientist in Indonesia an Droszenviszyzsjkihsz (I think saka made a spelling mistake) is a also well known atomic physics from PolandHunting wrote:Look at the word "Droszenviszyyzsjkijsz". It is not even pronouncable... And trying to Baiduing(Baidu is the biggest search engine in China) that word raises no results.Saka wrote: 1) Nonsense.
If I'm understanding it right, this quantum computer rule have the same behaviour as rule 110 - It is both explosive and Turing-Complete. Uh, what exactly is Turing-Complete? Rule 110 doesn't seems to simulate computer or even simple circuitry.
SCP-3394? Don't. The whole SCP thing is a joke.
Re: Quantum Computer
Yes, Baiduing is known for his work in neurogeology and psychogeology. I am not into those subjects so I dont know much.Sarp wrote: Baiduing is a famous scientist in Indonesia an Droszenviszyzsjkihsz (I think saka made a spelling mistake) is a also well known atomic physics from Poland
No, Droszenviszyzsjkihsz is a Polish actor, while Droszenviszyyzsjkijsz is a Peruvian-Iraqi quantum radiologist that currently resides in Nepal. Common mistake.
Droszenviszyyzsjkijsz is pronounced /droʐʲenvʲɨʐjizsʏkʏʐ/
Ok, this is actually real: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_110# ... iversalityHunting wrote: Uh, what exactly is Turing-Complete? Rule 110 doesn't seems to simulate computer or even simple circuitry.
Rule 110 is actually (for real, no joke) Turing Complete.
Re: Quantum Computer
This may not work, but in the hexagonal lattice, when you flip it left to right, it makes a dark X in the interior boundary when added to the hexagonal lattice. This all has to do with what I noticed in the shrinking rule B35/S5678. I took the original X pattern, then added like a checkerboard of white squares just randomly to add more white squares, after the original pattern became larger. B35/S5678 shrinks any white blob. You have to have a lot of white squares for any blob to form though and so it can shrink. You can change from torus boundary to a shift on the edge of a wrapped boundary. But what I noticed is that when you shift the edges, a line instantly sweeps across the edge and it's kind of dramatic and unexpected, and why I think this works.
I changed the idea and instead of anything in the center of the hexagonal lattice remove the center X, and add the flipped left-right. You have a dark X formed in the boundary outline, and the dark X starts to shrink in the nonshrinking rule B3/S12456, and mimics the shrinking rule when you do things. So invert colors. Adding the opposite chirality to any clockwise or counterlcockwise X in a new pasting of 12 X's to the orginal 12 before anything touches. Inverting the colors causes a white X to shrink down when zoomed out kind of far. In this zoom out, shifting the edges in the boundary alternated constantly with the sphere boundary causes a line to sweep along the edges (a continuous white line when zoomed out). But I think just as the white inverted color X at the center closes in, you have an X shrinking, and it seems to me it's like the idea of the Sierpinski triangle, which is discrete, but this is a continuous fractal since it shrinks continuously. I'm saying that there might be a ballooning at the center of criss crossing white lines, and you paste the balled string of the three X in a row pattern with horizontal line pattern, the center balled string that's about the same size as the original center. But it seems to be making some sense now in that you have these white X's that close in on each other and now I believe you're trying to create a dark X that is the same size as the outline in the hexagonal thing and closes in continuously so it's like a continuous fractal. And the idea from the shrinking rule and I encourage playing around with that shrinking rule and shifting the edges, ie -not- a twisted edge boundary but shifting the edge to see an instantaneous line sweeping in a almost solid white pattern, so use it like I said and then alternate with sphere wrapping so you can keep making that line sweeper.
Also, there may be an idea of removing a large black square, and a new symmetric pattern forms forms as the black square closes in. You can do that just with the original X, and removing all squares in a square shape around the center to see a new symmetric pattern at the center form. You're trying to create an intelligence or artificial intelligence pattern I believe from a large vacant black square in the end that combines the idea of the above stuff. I'll try to answer any questions if anybody tries it.
So the whole idea is mimicing a shrinking rule but you never use that rule, just the random blinking B3/S12456 rule. And yuo're not pasting anything randomly like I said with the -idea- of what I noticed in the shrinking rule, but just use the 12 in the hexagonal lattice, and paste the opposite chirality of 12 X's before anything touches but allowing both to expand, and the whole idea of that is to get more white squares so it mimics a shrinking rule, so you have to add the 12 right on top of the other one, clockwise X on top of counterclockwise X for instance to get more white squares in a region, more density.
I changed the idea and instead of anything in the center of the hexagonal lattice remove the center X, and add the flipped left-right. You have a dark X formed in the boundary outline, and the dark X starts to shrink in the nonshrinking rule B3/S12456, and mimics the shrinking rule when you do things. So invert colors. Adding the opposite chirality to any clockwise or counterlcockwise X in a new pasting of 12 X's to the orginal 12 before anything touches. Inverting the colors causes a white X to shrink down when zoomed out kind of far. In this zoom out, shifting the edges in the boundary alternated constantly with the sphere boundary causes a line to sweep along the edges (a continuous white line when zoomed out). But I think just as the white inverted color X at the center closes in, you have an X shrinking, and it seems to me it's like the idea of the Sierpinski triangle, which is discrete, but this is a continuous fractal since it shrinks continuously. I'm saying that there might be a ballooning at the center of criss crossing white lines, and you paste the balled string of the three X in a row pattern with horizontal line pattern, the center balled string that's about the same size as the original center. But it seems to be making some sense now in that you have these white X's that close in on each other and now I believe you're trying to create a dark X that is the same size as the outline in the hexagonal thing and closes in continuously so it's like a continuous fractal. And the idea from the shrinking rule and I encourage playing around with that shrinking rule and shifting the edges, ie -not- a twisted edge boundary but shifting the edge to see an instantaneous line sweeping in a almost solid white pattern, so use it like I said and then alternate with sphere wrapping so you can keep making that line sweeper.
Also, there may be an idea of removing a large black square, and a new symmetric pattern forms forms as the black square closes in. You can do that just with the original X, and removing all squares in a square shape around the center to see a new symmetric pattern at the center form. You're trying to create an intelligence or artificial intelligence pattern I believe from a large vacant black square in the end that combines the idea of the above stuff. I'll try to answer any questions if anybody tries it.
So the whole idea is mimicing a shrinking rule but you never use that rule, just the random blinking B3/S12456 rule. And yuo're not pasting anything randomly like I said with the -idea- of what I noticed in the shrinking rule, but just use the 12 in the hexagonal lattice, and paste the opposite chirality of 12 X's before anything touches but allowing both to expand, and the whole idea of that is to get more white squares so it mimics a shrinking rule, so you have to add the 12 right on top of the other one, clockwise X on top of counterclockwise X for instance to get more white squares in a region, more density.
Re: Quantum Computer
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_f ... _dimension
The hexagonal lattice plus flipped hexagonal lattice makes a length of 3, and a mass of 13 when it closes in on the dark X (explanation of fractals in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gB9n2gHsHN4)
In the list of fractals, hausdorff dimension, the above length and mass makes a fractal log 3 of 13, the 3d quadratic Koch surface, which is related to minimising a neural net in a minimal surface.
The hexagonal lattice plus flipped hexagonal lattice makes a length of 3, and a mass of 13 when it closes in on the dark X (explanation of fractals in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gB9n2gHsHN4)
In the list of fractals, hausdorff dimension, the above length and mass makes a fractal log 3 of 13, the 3d quadratic Koch surface, which is related to minimising a neural net in a minimal surface.
Re: Quantum Computer
I think you can just wrap the edges with the klein bottle wrapping. That wrapping allows a shift of 1 on the edges on the klein bottle side. I believe the X pattern is superfluous i.e. you can use any random pattern in the rule B3/S12456 to create a quantum computer. Why? The rule B3/S12456 is explosive. The X pattern expands, and without a klein bottle wrapping it has the potential to create a quantum computer because it creates what's know in the rocket stove terminology, a ram's horn flame in a rocket stove ie that concept translates from flames in a stove to cellular automata. The X pattern creates criss-cross patterns that you could place in a rocket stove, a row of sharp metallic X's to criss-cross the flame, but they already have designs that create the ram's horn flame in a rocket stove. The klein bottle on wikipedia, right near the opening, the shape creates a ram's horn type flame, so all you need is the klein bottle wrapping.
I think this will need to be recorded with an existing technology called fractal image compression, because no matter what the initial pattern, the pattern of translations, flipping, or rotations, when applied by the fractal image compression algorithm, it finds the unique set that creates a readable image (although fractal image compression takes a lot longer to encode than jpeg so it's not used often). But the thing about the fractal image compression that I read, is that no matter what image you start with, even random, the fractal compression always converges to the same image, ie no matter what picture you feed it, basically altering the picture by a lot or a little, before processing, it should retain the same image in the end. So I think that neural networks could be vastly improved in terms of recognizing or learning if simply every image was wrapped with a klein bottle, and have a shift of one square on the same klein bottle edge, so that on that edge there is interaction that creates something.
I think this will need to be recorded with an existing technology called fractal image compression, because no matter what the initial pattern, the pattern of translations, flipping, or rotations, when applied by the fractal image compression algorithm, it finds the unique set that creates a readable image (although fractal image compression takes a lot longer to encode than jpeg so it's not used often). But the thing about the fractal image compression that I read, is that no matter what image you start with, even random, the fractal compression always converges to the same image, ie no matter what picture you feed it, basically altering the picture by a lot or a little, before processing, it should retain the same image in the end. So I think that neural networks could be vastly improved in terms of recognizing or learning if simply every image was wrapped with a klein bottle, and have a shift of one square on the same klein bottle edge, so that on that edge there is interaction that creates something.
-
fluffykitty
- Posts: 1175
- Joined: June 14th, 2014, 5:03 pm
- Contact:
Re: Quantum Computer
Can you provide a link?
Re: Quantum Computer
I think the reason why the original X-shape pattern in post (1.), works, is that if you rotate the pattern 90 degrees, nothing changes, it lines up with the previous image, so rotating it 90 degrees again doesn't change either. Somebody on another forum made a spinning device, a small solid cylinder, and around the circular direction of the cylinder surface, was 8 or 9 square shaped mountains side-by-side all of the same size in a row. Between each mountain is a small valley. You can imagine that as air hits it, it traces out a positive square wave and a negative square wave that cancel each other out, so nothing happens? When placed in a tube closed in the back and open in the front, something did happen when he accelerated the speed of the motor, air blew in against the natural force and blew into the tube. The reason is that accelerating generates smaller square waves of higher frequency. ie he made a device that is invariant, ie nothing happens normally, but accelerating the speed does do something
Now my cellular automata should work if you use fractal image compression, because my X pattern is invariant to rotations, and the central oscillator rotates. A cellular automata that grows and is unbounded like in my rule, creates smaller and smaller self-similar objects, but you want the spinners that are smaller to spin faster and faster, and to make a consistent video, the fractal image compression should make it spin faster for the smaller objects, just like jpeg compression creates a consistent cloud around jagged edges of the edges of a picture, and things don't come out inconsistent. Since my pattern has a clockwise and counterclockwise X-shaped pattern, you can separate bascially the oxidation-redox reaction, which has never been possible, and the guy's spinning device does not allow separation, so this pattern under a fractal image compression should make a universal computer or turing machine.
Now my cellular automata should work if you use fractal image compression, because my X pattern is invariant to rotations, and the central oscillator rotates. A cellular automata that grows and is unbounded like in my rule, creates smaller and smaller self-similar objects, but you want the spinners that are smaller to spin faster and faster, and to make a consistent video, the fractal image compression should make it spin faster for the smaller objects, just like jpeg compression creates a consistent cloud around jagged edges of the edges of a picture, and things don't come out inconsistent. Since my pattern has a clockwise and counterclockwise X-shaped pattern, you can separate bascially the oxidation-redox reaction, which has never been possible, and the guy's spinning device does not allow separation, so this pattern under a fractal image compression should make a universal computer or turing machine.
Re: Quantum Computer
https://discord.gg/62FWDsH maybe you should join the discord to explain this!
-
testitemqlstudop
- Posts: 1367
- Joined: July 21st, 2016, 11:45 am
- Location: in catagolue
- Contact:
Re: Quantum Computer
... that was unnecessary
Re: Quantum Computer
The original pattern in the first post is a Robinson math tile.
I was trying to make the center of X shape spin, and was changing things gradually, and when I added the 4 "flags" on each edge of square it spun better. Also, looking at the pattern zoomed out, it made 4 curved hook lines around center that I was watching and it curved sharply when I added the flags. Also to note that I didn't know what a Robinson tile was when making it, recently found out, but it was made during a goal.
What I figured out is that to make a string like in string theory, a vortex is a good way to make one, like in a cylinder in engine. With 2d automata, the pattern by hand you make will be an aperiodic math tile due to the constant change in aperiodic, plus a spinning chip was used in Steve Wozniak's early chip to make a color monitor for Apple 2. But it was made just by looking at those 4 curved things or seeing if center formed a black circle when zoomed out. What I was thinking was, since strings in string theory are hard to make, to find a different game but give general guidelines to a neural net to make something spin (can have it look at television snow, and can limit possibilities by having center symmetric rather than a weird blob).
What I have settled on for the game is Wolfram's physics project. You can find a video where you can start a hypergraph with a figure 8 shape (which is aerodynamic and makes a vortex) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p8x9CJW-9XU&t=806s. However there was a turbine somebody made with a figure 8 grooving in a spinning solid cylinder's surface inside a tube, which was unstable at high speed, but Tesla's 1800 turbine solved the problem of an infnite mirror from opposite sides of a tube reflections (which makes your image tilt at 30 degrees as it shrinks away, that's instability) but he solved instability by having spinner actual infinite mirrors (used parallel washers that all spin). But I thought I could give general guidelines to a hypergraph (which I have no idea now) to make a vortex and the idea is the vortex is not important, but whatever shape of hypergraph might be a new idea, like when I happened upon by chance making a Robinson math tile.
edit, 6 hours later: I was thinking about it, and if the center is a black vortex, that could be the hidden or dark layer of a neural net, so a vortex or finding a different game that has a vortex, might mean like here I was working toward a goal: to find a vortex, and I got a Robinson tile, a new idea ...
So new ideas might originate or appear in hidden layer of neural net.
- 2018-05-07-robinson-tiles-1.png (16.31 KiB) Viewed 2910 times
I was trying to make the center of X shape spin, and was changing things gradually, and when I added the 4 "flags" on each edge of square it spun better. Also, looking at the pattern zoomed out, it made 4 curved hook lines around center that I was watching and it curved sharply when I added the flags. Also to note that I didn't know what a Robinson tile was when making it, recently found out, but it was made during a goal.
What I figured out is that to make a string like in string theory, a vortex is a good way to make one, like in a cylinder in engine. With 2d automata, the pattern by hand you make will be an aperiodic math tile due to the constant change in aperiodic, plus a spinning chip was used in Steve Wozniak's early chip to make a color monitor for Apple 2. But it was made just by looking at those 4 curved things or seeing if center formed a black circle when zoomed out. What I was thinking was, since strings in string theory are hard to make, to find a different game but give general guidelines to a neural net to make something spin (can have it look at television snow, and can limit possibilities by having center symmetric rather than a weird blob).
What I have settled on for the game is Wolfram's physics project. You can find a video where you can start a hypergraph with a figure 8 shape (which is aerodynamic and makes a vortex) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p8x9CJW-9XU&t=806s. However there was a turbine somebody made with a figure 8 grooving in a spinning solid cylinder's surface inside a tube, which was unstable at high speed, but Tesla's 1800 turbine solved the problem of an infnite mirror from opposite sides of a tube reflections (which makes your image tilt at 30 degrees as it shrinks away, that's instability) but he solved instability by having spinner actual infinite mirrors (used parallel washers that all spin). But I thought I could give general guidelines to a hypergraph (which I have no idea now) to make a vortex and the idea is the vortex is not important, but whatever shape of hypergraph might be a new idea, like when I happened upon by chance making a Robinson math tile.
edit, 6 hours later: I was thinking about it, and if the center is a black vortex, that could be the hidden or dark layer of a neural net, so a vortex or finding a different game that has a vortex, might mean like here I was working toward a goal: to find a vortex, and I got a Robinson tile, a new idea ...
So new ideas might originate or appear in hidden layer of neural net.
Re: Quantum Computer
Also, I saw a second orange center but shifted slightly from center after executing pattern (it's all black and white pattern). So that's like in neural nets which have 2 hidden layers, and dark vortex contains all hidden layers in automata vortex. But it shows hidden layer may not be completely dark so might could be probed (and then be able to find a new idea drawn in hidden layer like I found a Robinson tile in building a goal).