ConwayLife.com - A community for Conway's Game of Life and related cellular automata
Home  •  LifeWiki  •  Forums  •  Download Golly

Thread for basic questions

For general discussion about Conway's Game of Life.

Re: Thread for basic questions

Postby shouldsee » May 7th, 2016, 3:57 pm

I was measuring correlation of lifespan to the size of torus when I discovered this strange distribution.
Image

Why is it discrete rather than smooth?
EDIT: It later came out to be an artifact as I logrithmised the integer type lifespan, leading to a distortion to the original discrete distribution.

And why are there strange overlapping on the right?
Lifespan of 30000 random soup at 35% on 10x10 torus.
lifespan_life.xlsx

By the way, I noticed the log(lifespan) is proportional to the width of a square torus, at least for a small torus. I can't say why it's the case.
lifespan_B1S01D1step, one of my customised generation rule
Image
lifespan_life
Image
shouldsee
 
Posts: 406
Joined: April 8th, 2016, 8:29 am

Re: Thread for basic questions

Postby dvgrn » May 7th, 2016, 5:46 pm

NotLiving wrote:On a related note: is there an upper bound on the depth required to support an arbitrary row of still-life with only dead cells on the other side...?

Hmm. I thought at first this was the harder question about how many rows it might take to complete a still life, or stator, once you have a complete straight row of p1 cells.* I have a vague recollection of a discussion between people who were actually good at this kind of thing, years ago but I don't remember how many. In practice it seemed as if N rows were always needed, but it seemed possible that some yet-unseen weird configuration might need N+1 or N+2... for N somewhere between 3 and 5, if I recall correctly.

I think the answer is similar for an arbitrary row of still life with only emptiness beyond: seems to be single digits, but I don't know of a formal proof. There might possibly be a general method for constructing support, where it can be done -- in which case somebody has very likely solved the problem already, I just don't remember it or don't know about it. There aren't all that many cases to deal with, unless you allow ON cells in groups longer than two... but then to make it a still life you have to match it by an inductor on the other side, which is not "only dead cells". Are you intending to include length-3 and longer inductors in your question?

NotLiving wrote:...assuming there is a way to support said row...

Even with length-1 and length-2 chains of ON cells being all that is allowed, there are some configurations that can't actually be made stable if you're working from one side -- obobobo! and longer chains of alternating ON and OFF, right? Or am I missing a trick?

*EDIT: Vaguely related but not specifying any particular width: Richard Schroeppel's "Cool Out" Conjecture (from sometime before 1992) --

If a configuration C is locally stable over a rectangle R, then there exists a configuration C* such that (a) C* is locally equal to C over R; and (b) C* is globally stable.

-- which is still a conjecture as far as I know, EDIT but there's a lot I don't know [see next post].
User avatar
dvgrn
Moderator
 
Posts: 5701
Joined: May 17th, 2009, 11:00 pm
Location: Madison, WI

Re: Thread for basic questions

Postby calcyman » May 7th, 2016, 8:07 pm

dvgrn wrote:*EDIT: Vaguely related but not specifying any particular width: Richard Schroeppel's "Cool Out" Conjecture (from sometime before 1992) --

If a configuration C is locally stable over a rectangle R, then there exists a configuration C* such that (a) C* is locally equal to C over R; and (b) C* is globally stable.

-- which is still a conjecture as far as I know, and still probably true.


It was disproved almost 15 years ago, by RCS himself...

1515 From: Richard Schroeppel <rcs@c...>
Date: Tue Aug 7, 2001 2:04pm
Subject: Coolout Conjecture counterexample


An outstanding question is the "Coolout Conjecture":

Given a partial Life pattern that's internally consistent
with being part of a still life (stable pattern), is there always
a way to add a stabilizing boundary? Is there an upper bound
to the required boundary size, perhaps 3 cells thick?
[Variations for stabilizing/completing partial oscillators are
also proposed.]

Counterexample:

xx..xx
x.xx.x

The pattern is internally self-consistent with stability:
Each cell has a number of live neighbors that, with possible
boundary help, makes it stable.

But there's no way to stabilize the top edge:
To preserve the xs adjacent to the corner cells, the row
above the top edge must have six consecutive OFF cells.
But this prevents stabilizing the two OFF cells in the
middle of the top edge, each of which needs one or more
ON neighbors in the stabilizing row.

This example shows that internal consistency is not enough
for stabilizability; some additional hypothesis is required.
The obvious extra hypothesis to try is "1-cell boundary
consistency": that the pattern have at least one possible
1-cell thick extension that's consistent with stability.

There probably also need to be some topological restrictions
on the pattern: connected, or perhaps some kind of convexity.

Rich
What do you do with ill crystallographers? Take them to the mono-clinic!
User avatar
calcyman
 
Posts: 2052
Joined: June 1st, 2009, 4:32 pm

Re: Thread for basic questions

Postby Scorbie » May 7th, 2016, 8:57 pm

calcyman wrote:It was disproved almost 15 years ago, by RCS himself...
Gosh! I keep learning new things every day!
Best wishes to you, Scorbie
User avatar
Scorbie
 
Posts: 1379
Joined: December 7th, 2013, 1:05 am

Re: Thread for basic questions

Postby shouldsee » May 8th, 2016, 3:43 am

Continuing the lifespan topic.
Seemingly "replicator" is the only rule that exhibit a statistical different characteristic in the lifespan-torus size distribution.
Attachments
lifespans2.png
lifespans2.png (115.86 KiB) Viewed 10631 times
shouldsee
 
Posts: 406
Joined: April 8th, 2016, 8:29 am

Re: Thread for basic questions

Postby NotLiving » May 8th, 2016, 7:50 am

Thanks for the responses!

Food for thought.
NotLiving
 
Posts: 19
Joined: May 3rd, 2016, 3:47 pm

Re: Thread for basic questions

Postby muzik » May 8th, 2016, 1:31 pm

What is the highest "dimension" of an infinite growth pattern created?

By this I mean:

guns (SM), puffers (MS), and rakes (MM) are 2d, consisting of two main things,

breeders (MMS, MSM, SMM and MMM in most cases), consisting of 3 main things and are therefore 3D


So, have any 4d (for example, MMMM) "superbreeders" or the like been constructed?



On a similar topic, have MSS or SSS (things that make infinite bricklayers/blockstackers) been created?
Bored of using the Moore neighbourhood for everything? Introducing the Range-2 von Neumann isotropic non-totalistic rulespace!
muzik
 
Posts: 3310
Joined: January 28th, 2016, 2:47 pm
Location: Scotland

Re: Thread for basic questions

Postby Sphenocorona » May 8th, 2016, 10:51 pm

muzik wrote:What is the highest "dimension" of an infinite growth pattern created?

There isn't really any limit to this as far as I'm aware, though it must be remembered that the actual long-term population growth rate in an n-dimensional CA cannot exceed nth degree polynomial growth (2nd degree is quadratic, 3rd degree is cubic, etc). But we can still make things that act like what you've described. For example, I found a quadratic-growth MMMM 'super-breeder' in an old rule known as aurora19 a few years back. I'm sure there's some other examples out there.
Sphenocorona
 
Posts: 480
Joined: April 9th, 2013, 11:03 pm

Re: Thread for basic questions

Postby muzik » May 15th, 2016, 3:43 pm

The switch engine produces a replica of itself, and keeps doing so, at c/12 orthogonal:

x = 14, y = 13, rule = LifeHistory
10.D$.D.D5.D.D$D$.D2.D4.D2.D$3.3D5.2D$12.D4$9.A.A$8.A$9.A2.A$11.3A!


Of course, we already know how to stabilise this into a spaceship.


House, similarly, produces a replica of itself:

x = 5, y = 12, rule = LifeHistory
2A.2A$A3.A$.3A7$2D.2D$D3.D$.3D!


however it dies much quicker.

Can this be stabilised into a 9c/30 ship?
Bored of using the Moore neighbourhood for everything? Introducing the Range-2 von Neumann isotropic non-totalistic rulespace!
muzik
 
Posts: 3310
Joined: January 28th, 2016, 2:47 pm
Location: Scotland

Re: Thread for basic questions

Postby AbhpzTa » May 16th, 2016, 4:34 am

NotLiving wrote:What about patterns that are aperiodic, be it in space, time, or both? Does this still hold?


Ammann A2 / Wang 24 :
x = 384, y = 81, rule = LifeHistory
49D15.49D15.33D15.33D47.3D3C2D8B2DCDC3D16.3DCDC2D3B3C2B8D16.8D2BCBC3B
16.3BCBC2B3D3C2D$D47.D15.D47.D15.D31.D15.D31.D47.5DC2D2B4C2B2DC5D16.
4DC3D6BCB2D4C2D16.2D4C2DBCBC4B16.4BC3B5DC2D$D6.3D13.3D22.D15.D7.D14.
3D13.3D6.D15.D6.3D22.D15.D7.D14.3D6.D47.5DCDCBC4BCB3DC3DC16.8D3B3C2BD
C3DC2D16.2DC3DCD2BC4BC16.5B3C8D$D5.5D11.D3.D12.D.D6.D15.D7.D13.5D11.D
3.D5.D15.D5.D3.D12.D.D6.D15.D7.D13.5D5.D47.C5D2CB2C2B2CB4DCDCD16.C6DC
3BC4BD2C5D16.5DCDC6BCB16.C6BC2D2C3DC$D5.5D11.D3.D13.D7.D15.D5.5D11.5D
11.D3.D5.D15.D5.D3.D13.D7.D15.D5.5D11.5D5.D47.DC6D8B5D2CD16.C5DCDC7B
7DC16.C5DCD6BCB16.C7B2D2C2DCD$D5.5D11.D3.D12.D.D6.D15.D7.D13.5D11.D3.
D5.D15.D5.D3.D12.D.D6.D15.D7.D13.5D5.D47.C7D8B7DC16.7DC5B2CB7DC16.DCD
3C2D3BC3BC16.8B6DCD$D2.3D.3D13.3D17.3D2.D15.D2.3D2.D14.3D13.3D.3D2.D
15.D3.D2.3D17.3D2.D15.D2.3D2.D14.3D2.D3.D47.4D2C2D3BC4B4DCDCD16.2D2C
4D5BCBC8D16.2D2C4D2BCBC3B16.8B5D2CD$D.D3.D35.5D.D15.D.5D35.D3.D.D15.D
3.D21.5D.D15.D.5D21.D3.D47.3DC2DCD2BCBC3B4D2C2D16.2DC5D6B2C8D16.8D2BC
2BC2B16.3B2C3B8D$D.D3.D35.5D.D15.D.5D35.D3.D.D15.D.5D19.5D.D15.D.5D
19.5D.D47.4BCBCB3DCDC2D32.8D2C6B16.8B32.8B$D.D3.D35.5D.D15.D.5D35.D3.
D.D15.D3.D21.5D.D15.D.5D21.D3.D47.5BCB2C3DC3D32.8DCBC5B16.3B2C3B32.8B
$D2.3D33.3D.3D2.D15.D2.3D.3D33.3D2.D15.D3.D19.D2.3D2.D15.D2.3D22.D3.D
47.B2C3BCBDC6D32.3D2C3DB2C5B16.3B2C3B32.5BCBC$D37.D3.D5.D15.D5.5D37.D
15.D23.D7.D15.D6.D.D22.D47.BC5BCDC4D2C32.4DC3D8B16.C7B32.B2C2B2CB$D
37.D3.D5.D15.D5.5D37.D15.D21.5D5.D15.D7.D23.D47.BC6BC5DCD32.CDC5D6B2C
16.C5B2C32.2BC5B$D37.D3.D5.D15.D5.5D37.D15.D23.D7.D15.D6.D.D22.D47.C
7B8D32.D3C4D6BCB16.6BCB32.2C3B3C$D38.3D6.D15.D6.3D38.D15.D23.D7.D15.D
31.D47.4B2C2B8D32.4DC3D2B2C4B16.2B2C4B32.4BC3B$D47.D15.D47.D15.D31.D
15.D31.D47.4B2C2B3D2C3D32.3DCDC2D2BC5B16.2BC5B32.4B2C2B$D31.17D15.17D
31.D15.D15.17D15.17D15.D$D31.D47.D31.D15.D15.D47.D15.D$D31.D47.D31.D
15.D15.D47.D15.D$D31.D47.D31.D15.D15.D47.D15.D$D31.D47.D31.D15.D15.D
47.D15.D$D31.D47.D31.D15.D15.D47.D15.D$D27.D3.D47.D3.D27.D15.D2.3D10.
D47.D10.3D2.D$D2.D.D22.D3.D47.D3.D22.D.D2.D15.D.5D4.D.D2.D47.D2.D.D4.
5D.D$D3.D21.5D.D47.D.5D21.D3.D15.D.5D5.D3.D47.D3.D5.5D.D$D2.D.D22.D3.
D47.D3.D22.D.D2.D15.D.5D4.D.D2.D47.D2.D.D4.5D.D$D6.3D18.D3.D47.D3.D3.
D14.3D6.D15.D2.3D.3D6.D47.D6.3D.3D2.D$D5.D3.D12.D.D6.D47.D7.D13.5D5.D
15.D5.5D5.D47.D5.D3.D5.D$D5.D3.D13.D7.D47.D5.5D11.5D5.D15.D5.5D5.D47.
D5.D3.D5.D$D5.D3.D12.D.D6.D47.D7.D13.5D5.D15.D5.5D5.D47.D5.D3.D5.D$D
6.3D22.D47.D7.D14.3D6.D15.D6.3D6.D47.D6.3D6.D$D31.D47.D31.D15.D15.D
47.D15.D$33D47.33D15.17D47.17D47.8B2DCDC3D32.3DCDC2D3BC4B16.3B3C2B32.
8B$256.8B2D2C4D32.4DC3D2B2C4B16.5BC2B32.2B4C2B$256.8B8D32.8D8B16.8B
32.2BC2BC2B$256.3B2C3B8D32.7D2C6BC16.2CBC3BC32.8B$256.C2BC4B2D2C2D2C
32.DC5DCBC4BCB16.2B2C2BCB32.C6BC$256.BCBC4B3DC2DCD32.2C6DCBC3BCB16.C
5BCB32.BCBC3BC$256.2BC5B2DC5D32.8DB2C2B2CB16.5B2CB32.2B2C4B$256.5B2CB
2D2C4D32.6DCD8B16.8B32.8B$256.4DC2DC3BC4B8D16.3D3C2D5BCBC8D16.8D3BCBC
2B16.2BCBC3B8D$256.4DC2DC3BCBC2B2D4C2D16.6DCD4BCBCB8D16.8D4BC3B16.2BC
5B8D$256.5D2CD4B2C2B2DC2DC2D16.2DCDCDCD3BCBC2B3DC3DC16.2DC5D8B16.3BC
4B8D$256.C7D8B3D2C3D16.3CD2C2D4BC3B2DCDCDCD16.DCDC4DB2C5B16.3C5BD2C5D
$256.C7D8B7DC16.8D8B3D2CDCD16.2DC2D2CDB2C4BC16.8BDC4D2C$256.5DC2D4B2C
2B7DC16.C7D8B5DCDC16.2C4DCD7BC16.C7B3DC2DCD$256.3D3C2D3BC2BCB8D16.3D
2C3D2B2C4B5DC2D16.4DC3D8B16.8B2D2C4D$256.2DC5D4B2C2B3D2C3D16.2DC2DC2D
2BC5B4D2C2D16.4D2C2D3B2C3B16.4B2C2B2DC5D$33D47.33D15.17D47.17D$D31.D
47.D31.D15.D15.D47.D15.D$D6.3D22.D47.D7.D14.3D6.D15.D6.3D6.D47.D6.3D
6.D$D5.D3.D12.D.D6.D47.D7.D13.5D5.D15.D5.5D5.D47.D5.D3.D5.D$D5.D3.D
13.D7.D47.D5.5D11.5D5.D15.D5.5D5.D47.D5.D3.D5.D$D5.D3.D12.D.D6.D47.D
7.D13.5D5.D15.D5.5D5.D47.D5.D3.D5.D$D3.D2.3D22.D47.D7.D14.3D2.D3.D15.
D2.3D.3D2.D3.D47.D3.D2.3D.3D2.D$D3.D22.D.D2.D47.D2.D.D22.D3.D15.D.D3.
D5.D3.D47.D3.D5.D3.D.D$D.5D21.D3.D47.D3.D21.5D.D15.D.D3.D3.5D.D47.D.
5D3.D3.D.D$D3.D22.D.D2.D47.D2.D.D22.D3.D15.D.D3.D5.D3.D47.D3.D5.D3.D.
D$D3.D27.D47.D27.D3.D15.D2.3D6.D3.D47.D3.D6.3D2.D$D31.D47.D31.D15.D
15.D47.D15.D$D31.D47.D31.D15.D15.D47.D15.D$D31.D47.D31.D15.D15.D47.D
15.D$D31.D47.D31.D15.D15.D47.D15.D$D31.D47.D31.D15.D15.D47.D15.D$D31.
17D15.17D31.D15.D15.17D15.17D15.D$D47.D15.D47.D15.D31.D15.D31.D$D38.
3D6.D15.D6.3D38.D15.D23.D7.D15.D31.D$D37.D3.D5.D15.D5.5D37.D15.D23.D
7.D15.D6.D.D22.D$D37.D3.D5.D15.D5.5D37.D15.D21.5D5.D15.D7.D23.D$D37.D
3.D5.D15.D5.5D37.D15.D23.D7.D15.D6.D.D22.D$D2.3D33.3D.3D2.D15.D2.3D.
3D33.3D2.D15.D23.D2.3D2.D15.D2.3D26.D$D.5D35.D3.D.D15.D.D3.D35.5D.D
15.D2.D.D20.D3.D.D15.D.D3.D20.D.D2.D$D.5D35.D3.D.D15.D.D3.D35.5D.D15.
D3.D21.D3.D.D15.D.D3.D21.D3.D$D.5D35.D3.D.D15.D.D3.D35.5D.D15.D2.D.D
20.D3.D.D15.D.D3.D20.D.D2.D$D2.3D.3D13.3D17.3D2.D15.D2.3D2.D14.3D13.
3D.3D2.D15.D6.3D17.3D2.D15.D2.3D2.D14.3D6.D$D5.5D11.D3.D12.D.D6.D15.D
7.D13.5D11.D3.D5.D15.D5.D3.D12.D.D6.D15.D7.D13.5D5.D$D5.5D11.D3.D13.D
7.D15.D5.5D11.5D11.D3.D5.D15.D5.D3.D13.D7.D15.D5.5D11.5D5.D$D5.5D11.D
3.D12.D.D6.D15.D7.D13.5D11.D3.D5.D15.D5.D3.D12.D.D6.D15.D7.D13.5D5.D$
D6.3D13.3D22.D15.D7.D14.3D13.3D6.D15.D6.3D22.D15.D7.D14.3D6.D$D47.D
15.D47.D15.D31.D15.D31.D$49D15.49D15.33D15.33D!
Iteration of sigma(n)+tau(n)-n [sigma(n)+tau(n)-n : OEIS A163163] (e.g. 16,20,28,34,24,44,46,30,50,49,11,3,3, ...) :
965808 is period 336 (max = 207085118608).
AbhpzTa
 
Posts: 468
Joined: April 13th, 2016, 9:40 am
Location: Ishikawa Prefecture, Japan

Re: Thread for basic questions

Postby NotLiving » May 16th, 2016, 4:21 pm

Is there a name for patterns that would be spaceships, but require an infinite linear chain (not 2d tiling) of repeats to work?

Think of it as a subclass of a linear agar, or a generalization of a wick to allow non-stilllife.

For instance:

Code: Select all
x = 4, y = 5, rule = B3/S23:T0,5
o2bo$o2bo$b2o$b2o!


May be easier to see when repeated:

Code: Select all
x = 4, y = 25, rule = B3/S23:T0,25
o2bo$o2bo$b2o$b2o2$o2bo$o2bo$b2o$b2o2$o2bo$o2bo$b2o$b2o2$o2bo$o2bo$b2o
$b2o2$o2bo$o2bo$b2o$b2o!


(Also: why does the viewer miss a row of cells?)

Also, neat tiling!
NotLiving
 
Posts: 19
Joined: May 3rd, 2016, 3:47 pm

Re: Thread for basic questions

Postby codeholic » May 16th, 2016, 4:34 pm

It is still called a wick. In particular, this one is called ants.
Ivan Fomichev
User avatar
codeholic
Moderator
 
Posts: 1141
Joined: September 13th, 2011, 8:23 am
Location: Hamburg, Germany

Re: Thread for basic questions

Postby NotLiving » May 16th, 2016, 5:46 pm

Ah ok.

Is there a specific name for non-stilllife wicks, then?
NotLiving
 
Posts: 19
Joined: May 3rd, 2016, 3:47 pm

Re: Thread for basic questions

Postby muzik » May 18th, 2016, 3:17 pm

Are there patterns that are simply guns "by definition" and require no stabilisation components?

The Gosper glider gun consists of two queen bees and two blocks, and therefore is a "composite" gun. The Simkin gun similarly consists of blocks to stabilise it, etc. Whereas the b38/s23 gun I posted here earlier is just a pattern of its own with no stabilisation agents.

Could guns like that exist within normal life?
Bored of using the Moore neighbourhood for everything? Introducing the Range-2 von Neumann isotropic non-totalistic rulespace!
muzik
 
Posts: 3310
Joined: January 28th, 2016, 2:47 pm
Location: Scotland

Re: Thread for basic questions

Postby dvgrn » May 18th, 2016, 4:44 pm

muzik wrote:Are there patterns that are simply guns "by definition" and require no stabilisation components?

Could certainly happen. We've only searched 0% of the total space of B3/S23 pattern possibilities so far, even with Catagolue -- so how could we possibly know that something like that isn't out there?

I suspect there's probably a p14 pattern out there somewhere that's all one piece, looks like a supervolcano or a pipsquirter except probably bigger, but it spits out gliders instead of sparks. It's going to be mighty hard to find, is all.

What do you think of the period-156 multi-barrel gun? That's kind of made out of four identical pieces, but it could also be considered one piece. Would it count, if it wasn't for the four stabilizing blocks at the corners?
User avatar
dvgrn
Moderator
 
Posts: 5701
Joined: May 17th, 2009, 11:00 pm
Location: Madison, WI

Re: Thread for basic questions

Postby rowett » May 19th, 2016, 2:53 am

NotLiving wrote:(Also: why does the viewer miss a row of cells?)

This is a bug which will be fixed in the next released build of LifeViewer. Thanks for spotting it!
User avatar
rowett
Moderator
 
Posts: 1444
Joined: January 31st, 2013, 2:34 am
Location: UK

Re: Thread for basic questions

Postby muzik » May 19th, 2016, 3:50 am

dvgrn wrote:What do you think of the period-156 multi-barrel gun? That's kind of made out of four identical pieces, but it could also be considered one piece. Would it count, if it wasn't for the four stabilizing blocks at the corners?

Probably not. Those four blocks are pretty much required.

Now perhaps, if we were able to link many of these guns onto each other in a way that would make them not require those blocks...
Bored of using the Moore neighbourhood for everything? Introducing the Range-2 von Neumann isotropic non-totalistic rulespace!
muzik
 
Posts: 3310
Joined: January 28th, 2016, 2:47 pm
Location: Scotland

Re: Thread for basic questions

Postby Scorbie » May 19th, 2016, 8:00 am

muzik wrote:Probably not. Those four blocks are pretty much required.
The point of dvgrn's question was not to explicitly build one, but just checking what we are looking for precisely. To put dvgrn's question in another way:

Let us say that we found something similar to the p156 double barrelled gun, but with no external support. The gun has 4 identical units that mutually support each other. Would that count?

And from your reply, I guess the answer is "yes", right?
Best wishes to you, Scorbie
User avatar
Scorbie
 
Posts: 1379
Joined: December 7th, 2013, 1:05 am

Re: Thread for basic questions

Postby muzik » May 19th, 2016, 11:28 am

Scorbie wrote:
muzik wrote:Probably not. Those four blocks are pretty much required.
The point of dvgrn's question was not to explicitly build one, but just checking what we are looking for precisely. To put dvgrn's question in another way:

Let us say that we found something similar to the p156 double barrelled gun, but with no external support. The gun has 4 identical units that mutually support each other. Would that count?

And from your reply, I guess the answer is "yes", right?

Probably.

I was thinking about something else earlier: are there any infinite growth patterns that are a polyplet in at least one phase?
Bored of using the Moore neighbourhood for everything? Introducing the Range-2 von Neumann isotropic non-totalistic rulespace!
muzik
 
Posts: 3310
Joined: January 28th, 2016, 2:47 pm
Location: Scotland

Re: Thread for basic questions

Postby drc » May 19th, 2016, 4:02 pm

@muzik

Depends on what you mean. In B1/S, a single cell is a p2 c diagonal 2D replicator
This post was brought to you by the letter D, for dishes that Andrew J. Wade won't do. (Also Daniel, which happens to be me.)
Current rule interest: B2ce3-ir4a5y/S2-c3-y
User avatar
drc
 
Posts: 1664
Joined: December 3rd, 2015, 4:11 pm
Location: creating useless things in OCA

Re: Thread for basic questions

Postby dvgrn » May 19th, 2016, 4:29 pm

muzik wrote:I was thinking about something else earlier: are there any infinite growth patterns that are a polyplet in at least one phase?

drc wrote:@muzik

Depends on what you mean. In B1/S, a single cell is a p2 c diagonal 2D replicator

Even if you stick with B3/S23, a switch engine is infinite-growth, and it's a polyplet in quite a few of its phases.

If you meant "polyomino" (rookwise connected cells) instead of "polyplet" (kingwise connected cells), the answer is still "Sure!" -- if I'm understanding the question correctly. Just write a script to enumerate polyominoes, and run them through apgsearch. Sooner rather than later a switch engine will show up in the census. In fact, that was how Charles Corderman found the switch engine, back in 1971 (apparently by enumerating nonominoes, that is, not by using apgsearch).
User avatar
dvgrn
Moderator
 
Posts: 5701
Joined: May 17th, 2009, 11:00 pm
Location: Madison, WI

Re: Thread for basic questions

Postby SuperSupermario24 » May 22nd, 2016, 9:50 am

Sphenocorona wrote:But we can still make things that act like what you've described. For example, I found a quadratic-growth MMMM 'super-breeder' in an old rule known as aurora19 a few years back. I'm sure there's some other examples out there.

*looks through that thread*
That is indeed a rake that creates rakes that create rakes.
Well then.
bobo2b3o2b2o2bo3bobo$obobobo3bo2bobo3bobo$obobob2o2bo2bobo3bobo$o3bobo3bo2bobobobo$o3bob3o2b2o3bobo2bo!
User avatar
SuperSupermario24
 
Posts: 120
Joined: July 22nd, 2014, 12:59 pm
Location: Within the infinite expanses of the Life universe

Re: Thread for basic questions

Postby Extrementhusiast » May 22nd, 2016, 2:54 pm

Are there any infinite waves with c/2 < (speed) < c?
I Like My Heisenburps! (and others)
User avatar
Extrementhusiast
 
Posts: 1768
Joined: June 16th, 2009, 11:24 pm
Location: USA

Re: Thread for basic questions

Postby muzik » May 23rd, 2016, 8:49 am

Are there any guns that fire multiple types of spaceships?
Bored of using the Moore neighbourhood for everything? Introducing the Range-2 von Neumann isotropic non-totalistic rulespace!
muzik
 
Posts: 3310
Joined: January 28th, 2016, 2:47 pm
Location: Scotland

Re: Thread for basic questions

Postby calcyman » May 23rd, 2016, 10:37 am

muzik wrote:Are there any guns that fire multiple types of spaceships?


Yes, there are even configurations which fire an infinite sequence of distinct spaceships.
What do you do with ill crystallographers? Take them to the mono-clinic!
User avatar
calcyman
 
Posts: 2052
Joined: June 1st, 2009, 4:32 pm

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests