First Name v. Last Name for Oscillators

[thunk]

With the spate of recent soup search discoveries of oscillators, it has come to my attention that there seems to be an inconsistency in how oscillators (and to a lesser extent, other patterns) of the form "X's p(y)" are named.

Some use the discoverer's given name: "Karel's p28", "Achim's p16", "Jason's p11", "Scot's p5", "Gabriel's p138".

But some use their surname: "Elkies' p5", "Silver's p5", "Coe's p8", "Merzenich p18", "Nivasch's pseudo-barberpole".

Why do y'all think this is the case?

[codeholic]

Chance.

[drc]

Preference. I would rather have an oscillator be named "Dani's p19".

[codeholic]

How do you explain Gabriel's vs Nivasch's then?

[drc]

@codeholic

Preferences change.

[mniemiec]

I find use of first names to be more friendly. Unfortunately, first names are much less likely to be unique than last names. (This is why I have been adopting this convention in my own pattern collection). Also, in science in general, and mathematics in particular, discoveries almost always are credited to their discoverer's last names (e.g. Einstein's Theory of Relativity, The Pythagorean Theorem, Fermat's Last Theorem). Albert's Theory or Pierre's Theorem would make perfect sense to their friends at the time, not not to others years later.

[codeholic]

[...] discoveries almost always are credited to their discoverer's last names (e.g. Einstein's Theory of Relativity, The Pythagorean Theorem, [...]

Well, this is rather a counterexample

[apg]

[...] discoveries almost always are credited to their discoverer's last names (e.g. Einstein's Theory of Relativity, The Pythagorean Theorem, [...]

Well, this is rather a counterexample

Pythagoras of Samos had only one name, 'Pythagoras', so this is simultaneously his first name and last name. Hence, I believe Mark's statement was technically correct, and that Pythagoras isn't a counter-example.

[Scorbie]

[...] discoveries almost always are credited to their discoverer's last names (e.g. Einstein's Theory of Relativity, The Pythagorean Theorem, [...]

Well, this is rather a counterexample

Pythagoras of Samos had only one name, 'Pythagoras', so this is simultaneously his first name and last name. Hence, I believe Mark's statement was technically correct, and that Pythagoras isn't a counter-example.

I think codeholic refered to "this counterexample" as this mixed naming scheme in CGoL community, rather than the ones that Mark suggested.
I agree with codeholic that the naming scheme until now is made by chance. (The pre-conwaylife era seems to be a little bit "friends at that time"y in naming things.(Quote from Mark)) These days, people suggest names for new patterns and the discoverer chooses the name they like tho most, but in the 'pre-conwaylife' era, I think people didn't mind much whether to name a new pattern after their first or last name.
But, that doesn't mean it has to be named that way from now on. These days the discoverer chooses the pattern's name, and I think's good to let it as the discover's personal preference. If the discover doesn't mind then let it be one's last name.

[mniemiec]

These days the discoverer chooses the pattern's name, and I think's good to let it as the discover's personal preference. If the discover doesn't mind then let it be one's last name.

In the very early Life days, many patterns were often named by their discoverers, although many patterns were simultaneously discovered by different groups, resulting in many patterns having multiple names (e.g. "mango" and "cigar"), while others lacked names until somebody else decided to pick one. Some unnamed patterns were later named by others.

Many patterns weren't assigned names (e.g. all the still-lifes up to 7 bits had common names, plus about half the 8-bit ones, but the only named 9-bit one was the hat.) When Dave Buckingham was trying to systematically synthesize the thousand or so objects up to 14 bits, he create an arbitrary ad-hoc nomenclature, similar to that used in chemistry, to attempt to name many of them. I extended this somewhat, although since it just sort of grew together over time, there are many inconsistencies in it.

When I put together the first versions of my Life pages in the late '90s, I ended up just pulling arbitrary names out of thin air for some objects that either had no names, or had names I was unaware of - but that occurred frequently enough that some kind of name was needed, and I still wince when I see some of them have come into common use (e.g. the common "candelfrobra" is much more succinct than my awkward "long bookend eating tub", even though the latter is more descriptive).