Regarding the name of the """logarithmic""" replicator rule
Re: Regarding the name of the """logarithmic""" replicator rule
I've added a couple of blurbs to the article that succinctly identify why the name was changed. One in the opening bit and one in the growth section.
-
- Posts: 806
- Joined: April 26th, 2023, 5:47 am
- Location: Bahar Junction, Zumaland
Re: Regarding the name of the logarithmic replicator rule
That is the main reason. I am not dylexic, (Well, I am a teacher) BUT that deletion template cannot be overriden, so I did the next best thing I could. Sorry if it looked awkward, but that was the next best thing to do. (Also, that is something that can be exploited by vandals.)DroneBetter wrote: ↑December 11th, 2023, 6:56 amI think Haycat did that due to the page with the correct capitalisation being occupied by a redirect scheduled for speedy deletion.
P.S Can you stop making up untrue rumours about me? That is defamation and it is illegal. Also, it would take a really gullible person to believe those.
Last edited by Haycat2009 on December 28th, 2023, 12:58 am, edited 2 times in total.
~ Haycat Durnak, a hard-working editor
Also, support Conway and Friends story mode!
I mean no harm to those who have tested me. But do not take this for granted.
Also, support Conway and Friends story mode!
I mean no harm to those who have tested me. But do not take this for granted.
Re: Regarding the name of the """logarithmic""" replicator rule
"Phrase"-shifted "sparklers" has nothing to do with capitalization, redirects, or deletion templates.
User:HotdogPi/My discoveries
Periods discovered: 5-16,⑱,⑳G,㉑G,㉒㉔㉕,㉗-㉛,㉜SG,㉞㉟㊱㊳㊵㊷㊹㊺㊽㊿,54G,55G,56,57G,60,62-66,68,70,73,74S,75,76S,80,84,88,90,96
100,02S,06,08,10,12,14G,16,17G,20,26G,28,38,44,47,48,54,56,72,74,80,92,96S
217,486,576
S: SKOP
G: gun
Periods discovered: 5-16,⑱,⑳G,㉑G,㉒㉔㉕,㉗-㉛,㉜SG,㉞㉟㊱㊳㊵㊷㊹㊺㊽㊿,54G,55G,56,57G,60,62-66,68,70,73,74S,75,76S,80,84,88,90,96
100,02S,06,08,10,12,14G,16,17G,20,26G,28,38,44,47,48,54,56,72,74,80,92,96S
217,486,576
S: SKOP
G: gun
- confocaloid
- Posts: 3117
- Joined: February 8th, 2022, 3:15 pm
Re: meta-logarithmic replicator rule
It is well-known that dyslexic teachers exist.Haycat2009 wrote: ↑December 27th, 2023, 10:54 pmThat is the main reason. I am not dylexic, (Well, I am a teacher)
FWIW "the next best thing" you could try in that case, was to avoid doing any further moves/changes on the page which was obviously under dispute.Haycat2009 wrote: ↑December 27th, 2023, 10:54 pmBUT that deletion template cannot be overriden, so I did the next best thing I could.
- Consistently misspelling the same words: Phrase_shifted_sparklers?
- Lack of informative edit summaries (or any edit summaries at all): https://conwaylife.com/w/index.php?oldi ... your_edits
- Marking all edits as "minor", including incorrectly marking lots of significant content changes as "minor": https://conwaylife.com/w/index.php?oldi ... s_as_minor
127:1 B3/S234c User:Confocal/R (isotropic CA, incomplete)
Unlikely events happen.
My silence does not imply agreement, nor indifference. If I disagreed with something in the past, then please do not construe my silence as something that could change that.
Unlikely events happen.
My silence does not imply agreement, nor indifference. If I disagreed with something in the past, then please do not construe my silence as something that could change that.
-
- Posts: 806
- Joined: April 26th, 2023, 5:47 am
- Location: Bahar Junction, Zumaland
Re: meta-logarithmic replicator rule
Yeah, but calling me a troll is defamation. So is the random accusation that I am dyslexic. Can you please cut that out?confocaloid wrote: ↑December 28th, 2023, 2:39 amNeither of this is "rumours"; it can be seen in the log of your edits. Special:Contributions/Haycat2009
- Consistently misspelling the same words: Phrase_shifted_sparklers?
- Lack of informative edit summaries (or any edit summaries at all): https://conwaylife.com/w/index.php?oldi ... your_edits
- Marking all edits as "minor", including incorrectly marking lots of significant content changes as "minor": https://conwaylife.com/w/index.php?oldi ... s_as_minor
This is supposed to be intelligent discussion, not a "pull-off-the-best-insult" competition. After all, it would be a shame to be degenerated to just flinging rumours instead of discussing our issues. So please cut this out and delete the "I am a troll" post. If this continues, I will have to withdraw the promise.
Last edited by Haycat2009 on December 28th, 2023, 2:44 am, edited 1 time in total.
~ Haycat Durnak, a hard-working editor
Also, support Conway and Friends story mode!
I mean no harm to those who have tested me. But do not take this for granted.
Also, support Conway and Friends story mode!
I mean no harm to those who have tested me. But do not take this for granted.
-
- Posts: 806
- Joined: April 26th, 2023, 5:47 am
- Location: Bahar Junction, Zumaland
Re: meta-logarithmic replicator rule
That was Admin's orders. No defying them!confocaloid wrote: ↑December 28th, 2023, 2:39 amFWIW "the next best thing" you could try in that case, was to avoid doing any further moves/changes on the page which was obviously under dispute.Haycat2009 wrote: ↑December 27th, 2023, 10:54 pmBUT that deletion template cannot be overriden, so I did the next best thing I could.
Last edited by Haycat2009 on December 28th, 2023, 2:53 am, edited 1 time in total.
~ Haycat Durnak, a hard-working editor
Also, support Conway and Friends story mode!
I mean no harm to those who have tested me. But do not take this for granted.
Also, support Conway and Friends story mode!
I mean no harm to those who have tested me. But do not take this for granted.
- toroidalet
- Posts: 1514
- Joined: August 7th, 2016, 1:48 pm
- Location: My computer
- Contact:
Re: Regarding the name of the """logarithmic""" replicator rule
You are making the wrong choice.
Any sufficiently advanced software is indistinguishable from malice.
- confocaloid
- Posts: 3117
- Joined: February 8th, 2022, 3:15 pm
Re: Regarding the name of the logarithmic replicator rule
Inventing and trying to push a new name not in common use is a bad way of handling problems with correctness of existing names / terminology. This creates more problems than it could solve.DroneBetter wrote: ↑November 22nd, 2023, 3:55 pmIf anyone has any opinions, they may express them here, with the intention of coming to a consensus in a civil (albeit perhaps arbitrarily protracted :-) manner, that doesn't involve any back-and-forth deleterious sparring edits.
The common name logarithmic replicator rule reads and sounds as a good name. (Sufficiently good so that I'm willing to ignore correctness in this case.)
I looked again through the edit history and related pages. Neither of other names in the edit history is particularly inspiring or creative, to me at least. (Or even pronounceable, for that matter.) They're all obtained via mechanical replacement of a word.
The new name is bad. It's a good example of a bad name.
Just for the record, that chronology misses a question from AforAmpere (2023-09-10):DroneBetter wrote: ↑November 22nd, 2023, 3:55 pmI am of course incapable of impartiality, but will give as full a chronology as I can.
- No later than 2001-01-14: David Eppstein creates a page in his page, "Replicators: B36/S245"
- 2009-08-07: apg adds this to the Gun LifeWiki page, under the name "Logarithmic replicator rule"
- 2018-12-17: Muzik creates a page on the wiki under the same name, redirecting to Eppstein's page
- 2019-06-02: Ian07 turns this into a then-stubby, but full-fledged page of its own.
- 2019-06-26, 2020-04-12 (AforAmpere finds a 3-cell-wide pattern in an INT rule, emulating the replicator), 2020-08-19, 2021-05-22, 2021-10-21, 2022-09-25: Various uses of the name "Logarithmic replicator rule" appear in the forums
- 2023-09-29 (talk page): I find exact forms (in terms of bitwise and special functions) for the functions that give the number of iterations for the left and right edges to reach specific distances from the origin, in AforAmpere's emulator (equivalent to the 4-state Wolfram rule 0x190e002061040c0b86d0010e5980). This provides that the cell-length in the t'th iteration, l(t), has the asymptotic bounds 2*√t < l(t) < 2*√(5*t/3). As such, this prevailing name is incorrect, since the replicator's asymptotic width is Θ(√t).
- 2023-09-30 (Tiki bar), 2023-10-21 (my talk page): Disagreement ensues
AforAmpere wrote: ↑September 10th, 2023, 5:32 pmWhy is this called the 'logarithmic replicator'?As far as I can tell, the population hangs at a constant at the minima (approximately), and sqrt(t) at the maxima. Also, the bounding box follows sqrt(t) as well, so that's not it. I don't understand where the logarithmic part actually is. You can pick phases that align with log growth (2^t seems to align with logarithmic pop growth for one of the emulators I found), but that's cheating.Code: Select all
x = 19, y = 3, rule = B36/S245 6o7b6o$o4bo7bo4bo$b4o9b4o!
127:1 B3/S234c User:Confocal/R (isotropic CA, incomplete)
Unlikely events happen.
My silence does not imply agreement, nor indifference. If I disagreed with something in the past, then please do not construe my silence as something that could change that.
Unlikely events happen.
My silence does not imply agreement, nor indifference. If I disagreed with something in the past, then please do not construe my silence as something that could change that.
- DroneBetter
- Posts: 98
- Joined: December 1st, 2021, 5:16 am
- Location: The UK (a delightful place)
- Contact:
Re: Regarding the name of the logarithmic replicator rule
Apologies, I searched only for the full expression containing 'rule,' that was a good catch on your part, I will add it to the initial post.confocaloid wrote: ↑January 15th, 2024, 11:04 amJust for the record, that chronology misses a question from AforAmpere (2023-09-10):AforAmpere wrote: ↑September 10th, 2023, 5:32 pmWhy is this called the 'logarithmic replicator'?As far as I can tell, the population hangs at a constant at the minima (approximately), and sqrt(t) at the maxima. Also, the bounding box follows sqrt(t) as well, so that's not it. I don't understand where the logarithmic part actually is. You can pick phases that align with log growth (2^t seems to align with logarithmic pop growth for one of the emulators I found), but that's cheating.Code: Select all
x = 19, y = 3, rule = B36/S245 6o7b6o$o4bo7bo4bo$b4o9b4o!
Though the dates of our respective realisations are suspiciously close, it is only incidental. I was creating a LaTeX write-up regarding the findings I had made thus far in OCA:rule 120, when I thought it would be a good idea, if I were to include an appendix section regarding minimal rules that achieve the minimum asymptotic growth rate, to include the logarithmic replicator one as an explicit existing example, but upon simulating AforAmpere's 4-state emulator in my rule 225 analysis script, it occurred to me that its width's ratio to log(t) seemed to grow unboundedly; the formulas I added to the page were found by the observation that the 'first generation at which kth cell becomes on' function appeared to grow quite similarly to that of rule 225.
On that note, I am thinking about maybe uploading my write-up about the family of 1D rules as a PDF in the LifeWiki, eventually. Magma from the lounge gave me an observation that I had missed thus far, which is that my recursive form for s(k,t) is equivalently given by "1 if t's bits are a superset of o(k) else 0," a fact that is well-known in the n=1 (Sierpinski triangle) case, in which o(k)=k. This is relatively easily provable, and leads to many of the other forms being provable in terms of it, I think.
I don't think the forms for the B36/S245 replicator are provable in such a clean way without considering its recursively-defined structure, however.
That concludes my post (I hope you liked it)
- confocaloid
- Posts: 3117
- Joined: February 8th, 2022, 3:15 pm
Re: Regarding the name of the logarithmic replicator rule
I think it would be better to make a forum thread (or maybe a post in an existing thread), and post the information there.DroneBetter wrote: ↑January 18th, 2024, 2:22 pm[...] On that note, I am thinking about maybe uploading my write-up about the family of 1D rules as a PDF in the LifeWiki, eventually. [...]
I think LifeWiki works better as a place to document (in a comprehensible form) knowledge that was already previously posted somewhere else, and LifeWiki has a different target audience. The forums are good for talking to other enthusiasts. The wiki is aimed primarily at newcomers and readers, who are likely to know much less about the discussed topics, and might be struggling with basic ideas.
127:1 B3/S234c User:Confocal/R (isotropic CA, incomplete)
Unlikely events happen.
My silence does not imply agreement, nor indifference. If I disagreed with something in the past, then please do not construe my silence as something that could change that.
Unlikely events happen.
My silence does not imply agreement, nor indifference. If I disagreed with something in the past, then please do not construe my silence as something that could change that.