I need an example. Like, now. This sounds amazing.calcyman wrote:Yes, there are even configurations which fire an infinite sequence of distinct spaceships.
Thread for basic questions
Re: Thread for basic questions
Bored of using the Moore neighbourhood for everything? Introducing the Range2 von Neumann isotropic nontotalistic rulespace!

 Posts: 510
 Joined: April 9th, 2013, 11:03 pm
Re: Thread for basic questions
It's probably less exciting than you think. We know such a thing exists, and we know how to make one, but we haven't done it yet. The plan that I assume is being alluded to above involves creating a pattern that fires UCbased spaceships, with each one being extended trivially to be slower than the last by moving one section of the ship a little bit farther away from the rest of the ship.muzik wrote:I need an example. Like, now. This sounds amazing.calcyman wrote:Yes, there are even configurations which fire an infinite sequence of distinct spaceships.
On second thought, though, it might be possible to make such a gun that is at the very least interesting to watch working. A pattern firing ever slower caterloopillars would probably be quite a complicated gun, as it would essentially have to run the algorithm used to generate those spaceships and then construct the design it calculated. Might be too big and bulky to run in Golly, but it would certainly be an impressive demonstration of the technology we have so far.
But slowing speed isn't the only way to shoot infinitely many distinct ships. All you need to do is fire longer and longer chains of interacting MWSS or HWSS. Can't provide an example right now, but it's likely somebody has already done this, so I guess my second sentence of this post is probably a bit inaccurate...
Re: Thread for basic questions
Probably the most attainable construction of such a pattern would fire those c/2 ships that have a burning fuse reaction behind them, with longer and longer fuses each time just made by appropriate delay on the construction process. There is a grammar for arbitrarily long c/2 ships and whether or not they haven't all been explicitly shown constructible it seems pretty simple to construct them.
Physics: sophistication from simplicity.
Re: Thread for basic questions
A sortof example:muzik wrote:I need an example. Like, now. This sounds amazing.calcyman wrote:Yes, there are even configurations which fire an infinite sequence of distinct spaceships.
Code: Select all
x = 8, y = 5, rule = 0/2/3
5.AB$AB2.AB$AB.AB.A$.AB2.AB$6.AB!
\100\97\110\105
 lifeisawesome
 Posts: 86
 Joined: April 22nd, 2016, 1:55 pm
 Location: poland
Re: Thread for basic questions
What does (cis, trans, ortho, para) mean when naming patterns?
Szymon Bartosiewicz
favorite pattern:
favorite pattern:
Code: Select all
x = 2, y = 2, rule = B25/S3a
2o$2o!
Re: Thread for basic questions
All are terms borrowed from chemistry:lifeisawesome wrote:What does (cis, trans, ortho, para) mean when naming patterns?
cis on the same side
trans on the other side
ortho adjacent
para opposite
That said, it's often not easy to understand how to apply these terms to come up with a description of a still life or oscillator. And the other direction  visualizing the object from the description  is quite often not possible.
Very often the nomenclature seems pretty arbitrary to me, like the difference between transmirrored and transrotated Rbees. You just plain won't know all the shapes for sure in advance, if you only have the description and haven't memorized the objects.
Or loaveswithtails:
Code: Select all
x = 161, y = 39, rule = B3/S23
96bo31bo$89b4o8b4o21b5obob2o3b4ob4o3b4o$88bo7bo3bo5b5o17bo3b2o2bobo3bo
bo3bobo5b5o$88bo7bo4b3o24bo3bo5bo3bobo3bo2b3o$88bo7bo7bo23bo3bo5bo3bob
o3bo5bo$89b4o3b2o2b4o25b2obo6b4obo3bob4o7$o47bo30b2o55b2o$o19bo17bo5bo
3bo13bo11bo5bo16bo38bobo$4o3b3o3b4ob5o7bo3bo7b5obob2o8b5o2b4o9bo15bobo
38bobo$o3bobo3bobo3bo3bo3b5obo3bo3bo5bo3b2o2bob5o3bo3bo3bo3bo5bo15b2ob
o39bo$o3bobo3bobo3bo3bo9bobobo3bo5bo3bo3bo9bo3bo3bo3bo5bo18bo39b2o$o3b
obo3bobo3bo3bo9b2ob2o3bo5bo3bo3bo9bo3bo3bo3bo5bo18b2o$4o3b3o3b4o4b2o7b
o3bo3b2o5b2obo3bo10b2o2b4o3b2o4b2o14$b2o17b2o26bo30b2o56bo$2bo16bo2bo
15bo5bo3bo13bo11bo5bo16b2o37bobo$2bo4b3o3b4o2bo10bo3bo7b5obob2o8b5o2b
4o9bo15bo2bo36bo2bo$2bo3bo3bobo3bob3o3b5obo3bo3bo5bo3b2o2bob5o3bo3bo3b
o3bo5bo15bobobo36b2obo$2bo3bo3bobo3bo2bo10bobobo3bo5bo3bo3bo9bo3bo3bo
3bo5bo16bo2bo39bo$2bo3bo3bobo3bo2bo10b2ob2o3bo5bo3bo3bo9bo3bo3bo3bo5bo
19b2o38b2o$2b2o3b3o3b4o2bo10bo3bo3b2o5b2obo3bo10b2o2b4o3b2o4b2o!
#C [[ VIEWONLY ]]
I don't understand the extension to loafwithtails at all. It seems to be the key part of the loaf is opposite (trans) in the cisloafwithtail, and nearby (cis) in the transboatwithtail. If someone can explain that clearly with nice short words, I'll happily put the explanation in the Life Lexicon  maybe a general summary of uses of cis and trans, at least?
Anyway, the name assignments probably made sense to somebody when they were first invented, and those are definitely the names now. A different naming convention would probably make equally little sense to just as many people. The analogy is always going to be a little bit strained between organic chemistry (five and sixatom carbon rings) and Conway's Life objects, which might have fourfold or eightfold symmetry.
Re: Thread for basic questions
On the subject of prefixes, would "dia" mean anything?
Bored of using the Moore neighbourhood for everything? Introducing the Range2 von Neumann isotropic nontotalistic rulespace!
Re: Thread for basic questions
To me it is pretty natural. In the cis configuration it looks like the loaf (maybe the center of mass?) is on the same side of the tail, which is down. If there is a way to calculate the "standard deviation" of the cells, then I think it can be defined formally.dvgrn wrote: I don't understand the extension to loafwithtails at all. It seems to be the key part of the loaf is opposite (trans) in the cisloafwithtail, and nearby (cis) in the transboatwithtail. If someone can explain that clearly with nice short words, I'll happily put the explanation in the Life Lexicon  maybe a general summary of uses of cis and trans,
Best wishes to you!  Scorbie

 Posts: 795
 Joined: May 30th, 2016, 8:47 pm
 Location: Milky Way Galaxy: Planet Earth
Re: Thread for basic questions
Whoa. I know you have probably moved on from that ship to other things, but I suddenly have a lot of questions about the ship:muzik wrote: Of course, this is not always the case, as in this compact orthogonal c/5648:Code: Select all
x = 12, y = 14, rule = B3457/S4568 4bo2bo$4b4o$2b8o$2b2ob2ob2o$obobo2bobobo$2ob6ob2o$ob3o2b3obo$3ob4ob3o$ 2ob6ob2o$b3o4b3o$b3o4b3o$3b2o2b2o$3bo4bo$5b2o!
1. What is it called?
2. How was it discovered?
3. Are there any known guns that can produce it (I'd imagine they'd be pretty big or have to move constantly)?
Code: Select all
x = 81, y = 96, rule = LifeHistory
58.2A$58.2A3$59.2A17.2A$59.2A17.2A3$79.2A$79.2A2$57.A$56.A$56.3A4$27.
A$27.A.A$27.2A21$3.2A$3.2A2.2A$7.2A18$7.2A$7.2A2.2A$11.2A11$2A$2A2.2A
$4.2A18$4.2A$4.2A2.2A$8.2A!
Re: Thread for basic questions
It comes from a pretty explosive rule, and there are no smaller gliders, so I'm not sure if there would be any (small enough) guns for it (patterns also tend to stick to each other in this rule, so the ship would be kind of hard to seperate)Gamedziner wrote: Whoa. I know you have probably moved on from that ship to other things, but I suddenly have a lot of questions about the ship:
1. What is it called?
2. How was it discovered?
3. Are there any known guns that can produce it (I'd imagine they'd be pretty big or have to move constantly)?

How many other small blinker puffers are there? Here is my microscopic stamp collection, complete with horribly drawn numbers:
Code: Select all
x = 42, y = 84, rule = B3/S23
20b2o2b2o$6bo13b2o2bo$4bo3bo9b2o5bo$3bo14b2o4b2o$3bo4bo$3b5o16b2o$24bo
$19bob2obo$19b2obob2o$4b2o$3b2ob3o$4b4o$5b2o2$8b2o$6bo4bo$5bo$5bo5bo$
5b6o8$22b2obo2b2o$22bob2o2b2o2$28b2o$22b2obo3bo$10b4o8bob2o2bo$10bo3bo
13b2o$10bo$b2o8bo2bo7bob2o2b2o$2ob2o17b2obo2b2o$b4o3bo$2b2o3bob2o$6bo
3bo$2b2o3bob2o$b4o3bo$2ob2o$b2o8bo2bo$10bo$10bo3bo$10b4o13$24b2obob2o$
4b2o18bob2obo$2bo26bo$bo6bo20b2o5b2o2b2o$bo8bo25b2o2bo$b8obo13b2ob4o3b
2o5bo$6b2o17bobo2bo3b2o4b2o$25bo$24b2o14b2o$2b2o36bo$b2ob2o18b4ob2o4bo
b2obo$2b4o3bo14bo2bob2o4b2obob2o$3b2o3bobo2b2o$7bo3b2o2bo$3b2o3bobo2b
2o$2b4o3bo$b2ob2o$2b2o3$6b2o$b8obo$bo8bo$bo6bo$2bo$4b2o!
Bored of using the Moore neighbourhood for everything? Introducing the Range2 von Neumann isotropic nontotalistic rulespace!
Re: Thread for basic questions
Spaceships do not produce switch engines, these would be puffers/breeders.alvinpark wrote:which spaceship produce switch engine ?
Pretty sure this is a bot post though
Bored of using the Moore neighbourhood for everything? Introducing the Range2 von Neumann isotropic nontotalistic rulespace!
Re: Thread for basic questions
Two questions:
1: Could a c/12 diagonal (corder)ship smaller than the current record holder 134cell Cordership exist?
2. are there any c/4 orthogonal spaceships that can reflect a glider in such a way that you could perpetually pingpong a glider between two of them?
1: Could a c/12 diagonal (corder)ship smaller than the current record holder 134cell Cordership exist?
2. are there any c/4 orthogonal spaceships that can reflect a glider in such a way that you could perpetually pingpong a glider between two of them?
Bored of using the Moore neighbourhood for everything? Introducing the Range2 von Neumann isotropic nontotalistic rulespace!
Re: Thread for basic questions
It's certainly possible. There isn't even any way to definitively rule out some really unlikely way to burn the debris from a blocklaying switch engine cleanly at a speed of exactly c/12... so we can't definitively rule out the possibility that the true recordsmallest Cordership is just one switch engine plus some trailing junk.muzik wrote:1: Could a c/12 diagonal (corder)ship smaller than the current record holder 134cell Cordership exist?
It seems somewhat more likely  but still not terribly likely  that an "orbit" could be found where the debris from two interacting switch engines could be burned cleanly. If we wanted to give a really good shot at finding that, we could try setting up something along the lines of the script that codeholic wrote to find the p36 fuse for pufferfish exhaust, starting with different randomized pairings of switch engines with a block of random soup a short distance behind them. Run millions of those through a hacked apgsearch, and see if something new and interesting ever comes out.
Re: Thread for basic questions
Late reply I know, so does this mean one cannot exist in normal Life (but can in other specialised cellular automaton)?Sphenocorona wrote:There isn't really any limit to this as far as I'm aware, though it must be remembered that the actual longterm population growth rate in an ndimensional 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 quadraticgrowth MMMM 'superbreeder' in an old rule known as aurora19 a few years back. I'm sure there's some other examples out there.muzik wrote:What is the highest "dimension" of an infinite growth pattern created?
What I was thinking for an example, would be something similar to breeder 1, which is a Gosper glider gun producing puffer, but have the guns spaced out a bit more. Then the thing that creates the breeders would position them so that the created Gosper glider guns would fire through the gaps in each other. However, this would probably only work twice before turning into a massive mess.
So, I take it it's not possible to build a moving pattern that creates moving patterns which create rakes?
Bored of using the Moore neighbourhood for everything? Introducing the Range2 von Neumann isotropic nontotalistic rulespace!
 A for awesome
 Posts: 2286
 Joined: September 13th, 2014, 5:36 pm
 Location: Pembina University, Home of the Gliders
 Contact:
Re: Thread for basic questions
It probably is, but the final rakes' output cannot last forever; the output must be destroyed eventually to maintain a quadratic growth rate at most.muzik wrote:So, I take it it's not possible to build a moving pattern that creates moving patterns which create rakes?
praosylen#5847 (Discord)
x₁=ηx
V*_η=c²√(Λη)
K=(Λu²)/2
Pₐ=1−1/(∫^∞_t₀(p(t)ˡ⁽ᵗ⁾)dt)
$$x_1=\eta x$$
$$V^*_\eta=c^2\sqrt{\Lambda\eta}$$
$$K=\frac{\Lambda u^2}2$$
$$P_a=1\frac1{\int^\infty_{t_0}p(t)^{l(t)}dt}$$
x₁=ηx
V*_η=c²√(Λη)
K=(Λu²)/2
Pₐ=1−1/(∫^∞_t₀(p(t)ˡ⁽ᵗ⁾)dt)
$$x_1=\eta x$$
$$V^*_\eta=c^2\sqrt{\Lambda\eta}$$
$$K=\frac{\Lambda u^2}2$$
$$P_a=1\frac1{\int^\infty_{t_0}p(t)^{l(t)}dt}$$
Re: Thread for basic questions
Yeah, there's no technical difficulty in building such a pattern  except for dying of boredom or frustration in the design stage. It's just that when you run the pattern, you might get a massive mess after a while, as you suggested.A for awesome wrote:It probably is, but the final rakes' output cannot last forever; the output must be destroyed eventually to maintain a quadratic growth rate at most.muzik wrote:So, I take it it's not possible to build a moving pattern that creates moving patterns which create rakes?
For example, an Eastmoving object could build regularly spaced Northmoving rake builders, each of which would start building regularlyspaced Westmoving rakes. So far so good! It's not a problem that more and more rakes will be created simultaneously, as time goes on  they're all traveling West at the same speed, so they'll stay out of each other's way.
The problem is that no matter which cardinal or intercardinal direction you choose for the rakes' output, that output is going to start hitting other rakes, sooner rather than later. Only the rakes on the outermost edge(s) will be safe from other rakes, depending on the geometry.
It would probably be possible to build in to each rake some defenses against other rakes' output  but then any suppressed rakes don't add anything to population growth after a while.
Re: Thread for basic questions
Wait, wouldn't that mean you could add in diagonal or oblique rakes, rakes of rakes, etc?dvgrn wrote:For example, an Eastmoving object could build regularly spaced Northmoving rake builders, each of which would start building regularlyspaced Westmoving rakes. So far so good! It's not a problem that more and more rakes will be created simultaneously, as time goes on  they're all traveling West at the same speed, so they'll stay out of each other's way.
Bored of using the Moore neighbourhood for everything? Introducing the Range2 von Neumann isotropic nontotalistic rulespace!
Re: Thread for basic questions
Are there any statorless rotating oscillators, etc in normal Life?
By that, I mean like these:
here's that gun again:
By that, I mean like these:
Code: Select all
x = 4, y = 3, rule = B36ce7c_S23y
2o$obo$2b2o!
Code: Select all
x = 4, y = 3, rule = tlife
3o$3o$3bo!
Code: Select all
x = 22, y = 21, rule = B38/S23
4$4b3o$4bo3bo$3b2o3bo$2b2o5bo$2b2o2b2o2bo$8bobo$9bo!
Bored of using the Moore neighbourhood for everything? Introducing the Range2 von Neumann isotropic nontotalistic rulespace!
Re: Thread for basic questions
Yeah, I could build one. But it would be a big selfconstructing and selfdestructing thing.muzik wrote:Are there any statorless rotating oscillators, etc in normal Life?...
At least it would give an (unreasonable) upper bound of some sort. So then the question becomes, what is the smallest such statorless rotating oscillator?
... Unfortunately having an upper bound doesn't make it an answerable question. The smallest one could be quite small, findable by running a hacked apgsearch for a few decades... or the smallest one could actually be a hyperoptimized selfconstructing thing that encodes its own pattern in some clever way.
There's no way to know, unless it turns out that the smallest one fits in an MxN box, with M and N small enough that technology eventually advances to allow us to exhaustively search the space.
Re: Thread for basic questions
All hail the almighty universal constructor argument.dvgrn wrote:Yeah, I could build one. But it would be a big selfconstructing and selfdestructing thing.muzik wrote:Are there any statorless rotating oscillators, etc in normal Life?...
At least it would give an (unreasonable) upper bound of some sort. So then the question becomes, what is the smallest such statorless rotating oscillator?
... Unfortunately having an upper bound doesn't make it an answerable question. The smallest one could be quite small, findable by running a hacked apgsearch for a few decades... or the smallest one could actually be a hyperoptimized selfconstructing thing that encodes its own pattern in some clever way.
There's no way to know, unless it turns out that the smallest one fits in an MxN box, with M and N small enough that technology eventually advances to allow us to exhaustively search the space.
If you think about it, the phoenix family could be considered statorless and rotating, but I'm not too sure about that. To narrow it down: a rotating, statorless oscillator whose bounding box expands and contracts to a certain degree.
But what about not rotating, but flipping?:
Code: Select all
x = 3, y = 4, rule = salad
o$2o$b2o$2bo!
And, to pressurise this thread with even more unneccesary questions, are there any more oscillators which use the fuse part of a loaf, CFWTT, etc. (but not the back or sides) as a stator?
Code: Select all
x = 18, y = 20, rule = B3/S23
3bo$3bo$2b2obo9b3o$bo3b2o6bob3o$obo9bobobo$o2bo8bo2bo$b2o10b2o6$4b3o2$
3bo4bo$2bobo3bo$2bo2bo2bo$b2o3bo$3b3o$3bo!
Bored of using the Moore neighbourhood for everything? Introducing the Range2 von Neumann isotropic nontotalistic rulespace!
Re: Thread for basic questions
Well, this oscillator uses just a fuse:
Code: Select all
x = 9, y = 9, rule = Life
4bo$4bo$4b2o$6bo$3o2bo2bo$2bobo3bo$3bo4bo2$4b3o!
\100\97\110\105
Re: Thread for basic questions
yep, that's 2 pulsar quadrants.drc wrote:Well, this oscillator uses just a fuse:Code: Select all
x = 9, y = 9, rule = Life 4bo$4bo$4b2o$6bo$3o2bo2bo$2bobo3bo$3bo4bo2$4b3o!
I'm only looking for oscillators that use the fuse part of a loaf, cis fuse, etc. This can if you remove one
Bored of using the Moore neighbourhood for everything? Introducing the Range2 von Neumann isotropic nontotalistic rulespace!
Re: Thread for basic questions
Well, are there any?
Bored of using the Moore neighbourhood for everything? Introducing the Range2 von Neumann isotropic nontotalistic rulespace!
Re: Thread for basic questions
I read a couple of days ago about a pond and block collocation that could eat HWSS xor MWSS, but I don't remember how it was. I have already tried looking for it on LifeWiki, but since it was neither a still life nor a pseudostill life or any notable pattern per se, my attempts have been useless. Could someone remind me of how it was?
Re: Thread for basic questions
Brice Due called it a "honeybit buffer", because of the ability of the same small constellation to store information  set with a glider, test or reset with an LWSS:Rhombic wrote:I read a couple of days ago about a pond and block collocation that could eat HWSS xor MWSS, but I don't remember how it was. I have already tried looking for it on LifeWiki, but since it was neither a still life nor a pseudostill life or any notable pattern per se, my attempts have been useless. Could someone remind me of how it was?
Code: Select all
x = 76, y = 42, rule = B3/S23
24bo$25bo$23b3o4$71b4o$71bo3bo$71bo$72bo2bo7$34b2o$33bo2bo$34b2o16$35b
2o$b6o15b2o10bo2bo$o5bo11b4ob2o9bo2bo$6bo11b6o11b2o$o4bo13b4o$2b2o$34b
2o$34b2o!
I think the pondandblock is only an eater for HWSSes, though.