dvgrn wrote:Hadn't thought about the adjustable delay between successive rake gliders at all -- you get +8N delay just by moving a rake unit N full diagonals southwest, which is pretty much equivalent to moving the target by N fd northeast, but sometimes one will be more convenient than the other. Guess I'll have to adjust my input format to allow for that. More eventually --
codeholic wrote:Excellent result! Congratulations!
codeholic wrote:EDIT: It seems to me that the bounding box could be significantly reduced, if you used the full width between NW and SE half-bakeries.
Having said that, is it really worth to find better designs for the 31c/240 spaceship's front, when there is already a working one? Is it worth to find cheaper syntheses for *WSS seeds, when there is a proof, that you can use those more expensive, but already found ones?
codeholic wrote:I'd say it's different. Switching from the design, that required slow-elbow construction and that would eventually require a more complicated algorithm for an assembly script, was a qualitative leap. That's something we should really take care of before the assembly.
On the other hand, building 27 or only 4 *WSS salvos with the same slow salvo techniques is just about quantity. (Actually, following the bleeding-edge optimised design for the 31c/240 spaceship would require even a more complicated assembly script, because it involves different types of rakes.)
dvgrn wrote:I am tempted to build a period-2124679 HBK, since that's within easy reach -- the current semibake script doesn't pack nonshoots together quite as tightly as it could
knightlife wrote:Another challenge for optimising the half-baked knightship could be to beat Gemini in terms of minimum population, and the gap is pretty surmountable (1,049K versus 846K).
knightlife wrote:This can be probably done solely by switching to the 7-glider design and cheaper seeds for the NW salvo gliders.
codeholic wrote:Another challenge for optimising the half-baked knightship could be to beat Gemini in terms of minimum population, and the gap is pretty surmountable (1,049K versus 846K). This can be probably done solely by switching to the 7-glider design and cheaper seeds for the NW salvo gliders.
Kazyan wrote:Now that there's the HBK series, the Caterpillar, and the WIP 31c/240 spaceship, it would be useful to have a name for this type of reaction (A + B -> displaced A + displaced B) that can be used to create mega-spaceships. The HBK reaction is clearly in a different subcategory than the 17c/45 and 31c/240 reactions, but we don't have a lot of examples. How about "monomer"?
x = 42, y = 25, rule = B3/S23
calcyman wrote:knightlife wrote:This can be probably done solely by switching to the 7-glider design and cheaper seeds for the NW salvo gliders.
Even that's unnecessary. The attached pattern has period 1500000 and 610 kilocells, just by 5 minutes of changing some parameters in the Python script.
These reductions are quite impressive! It's now not only smaller than Gemini in terms of the number of cells, but also shorter than the caterpillar!
calcyman wrote:Also, what ever happened to (13,1)c/31? That was all the rage when I was growing up...
calcyman wrote:Getting the period below 10^6 would require some actual reworking (e.g. optimising the slow salvos), I imagine, although it should be possible.
#C sample comparison between current HBK and optimal HB placements,
#C with 5 rake units. Cost savings are 13fd per unit from here on.
x = 187, y = 144, rule = B3/S23
codeholic wrote:EDIT: Would you please share the latest version of the semibake script?
Users browsing this forum: AbhpzTa and 6 guests