Reflectorless Rotating Oscillator Discussion Thread in Life

For discussion of specific patterns or specific families of patterns, both newly-discovered and well-known.
Post Reply

User avatar
BlinkerSpawn
Posts: 1952
Joined: November 8th, 2014, 8:48 pm
Location: Getting a snacker from R-Bee's

Re: Reflectorless Rotating Oscillator Discussion Thread in Life

Post by BlinkerSpawn » January 27th, 2018, 11:49 am

I'm certain we have more than sufficient technology to make a self-constructing/destroying loop.
LifeWiki: Like Wikipedia but with more spaceships. [citation needed]

Image

User avatar
Macbi
Posts: 719
Joined: March 29th, 2009, 4:58 am

Re: Reflectorless Rotating Oscillator Discussion Thread in Life

Post by Macbi » January 27th, 2018, 11:55 am

The problem is that any kind of Geminoid construction won't work, because the two pieces would move by different amounts.

User avatar
BlinkerSpawn
Posts: 1952
Joined: November 8th, 2014, 8:48 pm
Location: Getting a snacker from R-Bee's

Re: Reflectorless Rotating Oscillator Discussion Thread in Life

Post by BlinkerSpawn » January 27th, 2018, 12:53 pm

Macbi wrote:The problem is that any kind of Geminoid construction won't work, because the two pieces would move by different amounts.
I was thinking more along the lines of a loop a la the newest spiral-growth except I don't know how to put new elbows at the opposing corners since you can't just leave them there.
LifeWiki: Like Wikipedia but with more spaceships. [citation needed]

Image

User avatar
dvgrn
Moderator
Posts: 6497
Joined: May 17th, 2009, 11:00 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: Reflectorless Rotating Oscillator Discussion Thread in Life

Post by dvgrn » January 28th, 2018, 1:32 am

BlinkerSpawn wrote:
Macbi wrote:The problem is that any kind of Geminoid construction won't work, because the two pieces would move by different amounts.
I was thinking more along the lines of a loop a la the newest spiral-growth except I don't know how to put new elbows at the opposing corners since you can't just leave them there.
This stuff is slightly tricky but all definitely known technology, a mix of mechanisms previously seen in the 10hd and 0hd Demonoids and in the linear propagator. Latest progress on a potential RRO design is posted in the Self-Synthesizing Spaceship thread.

It may not be terribly obvious, except maybe with hindsight, that a self-synthesizing spaceship can be configured to travel in three different ways, with pretty much the same amount of design work:
  • diagonally (optionally with a slight oblique shift for extra exotic flavor)
  • orthogonally, by mirror-reflecting after each cycle and thus traveling in a zigzag
  • in a loop, either four steps of 90 degrees or two steps with a 180-degree turn, making a reflectorless rotating oscillator.
EDIT: Now that you mention it, though, it's not necessarily true that "any kind of Geminoid construction" wouldn't work! There's a possible RRO design that's also a mix of a Demonoid and the linear propagator, that would probably be somewhat simpler than a self-synthesizing spaceship memory loop design -- it wouldn't require two copies of the construction data.

Let's see if it still looks good after I run through a summary:
  • start with a Demonoid, but replace let's say the SW end with a constructor arm attached to a 90-degree reflector, not the usual 180-degree one. This end of the RROnoid will pretty much rotate in place.
  • All construction is done from this 90-degree construction-arm end -- the 180-degree end will be just a simple reflector
  • First the constructor builds and launches a Cordership seed. The Cordership heads back in the direction that the recipe gliders are coming from.
  • Next the constructor sends a Cordership-stopping recipe either in the opposite direction, or in the 90 degrees counterclockwise direction, to catch a Cordership that was launched one or two cycles ago. (Which of these allows the timing, or rather the spacing, to work out correctly? It's too late at night for me to sort it out, but I think one of them is right.)
  • The Cordership-stopping recipe builds a new 180-degree reflector end in the correct location.
  • The recipe builds a new 90-degree construction arm.
  • The recipe sends gliders to shoot down the previous 90-degree construction arm _and_ the previous 180-degree reflector, using either long-distance sniping or, more likely, an elbow block left near the old 180-degree reflector for this purpose.
  • The recipe gliders reflected by the 90-degree construction arm bounce off an existing 180-degree reflector (constructed in a previous cycle) and return to feed into the newly constructed 90-degree construction arm.
  • Done! The cycle repeats.
  • To make cleanup easier, the 90-degree and 180-degree circuits could be easily wired to self-destruct after use, with a single trigger glider coming in from somewhere -- lots of options there.

User avatar
77topaz
Posts: 1472
Joined: January 12th, 2018, 9:19 pm

Re: Reflectorless Rotating Oscillator Discussion Thread in Life

Post by 77topaz » January 28th, 2018, 3:46 am

dvgrn wrote:in a loop, either four steps of 90 degrees or two steps with a 180-degree turn, making a reflectorless rotating oscillator.
Would a loop of two steps with a 180-degree leave enough room for a second copy of the oscillator to cycle at the same time, though? Because, to have a proper RRO (of period p), it needs to be possible to have n copies loop the same circuit to create a single oscillator of period p/n, for some n greater than one. This should be possible with a four-step loop, but I'm not sure if there would be enough space in a two-step loop without the copies interfering with each other.

User avatar
dvgrn
Moderator
Posts: 6497
Joined: May 17th, 2009, 11:00 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: Reflectorless Rotating Oscillator Discussion Thread in Life

Post by dvgrn » January 28th, 2018, 8:42 am

77topaz wrote:
dvgrn wrote:in a loop, either four steps of 90 degrees or two steps with a 180-degree turn, making a reflectorless rotating oscillator.
Would a loop of two steps with a 180-degree leave enough room for a second copy of the oscillator to cycle at the same time, though?
Maybe not, you're right. Was thinking about the multiplicity problem after posting -- I don't think any of the pieces get in each other's way for the 90-degree case, but would have to do a detailed layout to make sure.

We could patch up the 180-degree case by building two 180-degree reflectors next to each other at the Cordership shoot-down point, and a 180-degree reflector plus a 0-degree constructor arm in the center. Send the recipe back and forth twice. That would create enough space, I believe, though current versions of HashLife would be even less happy with it.

User avatar
GUYTU6J
Posts: 976
Joined: August 5th, 2016, 10:27 am
Location: 中国

Re: Reflectorless Rotating Oscillator Discussion Thread in Life

Post by GUYTU6J » June 23rd, 2019, 11:11 pm

Sorry for necroposting.Could we just construct a RRO entirely composed of gliders with this naive idea?
1.Start with the all-glider phase.The 1st glider hits the 2nd glider, which creates an elbow.
2.The following slow salvo constructs the freeze-dried salvo of the whole RRO.
3.The last glider triggers the seed, regenerating the original all-glider phase but at another orientation.
Could we make more with less in step 2? And would it be easier to regenerate at another orientation than at original orientation(possibly with displacement)?
EDIT:The step 3 could have trouble with the order of seed actication.
Skimmed to: Soup search results Pg59
To be done: butter synthesis
Why do others have so much time posting around?
-GUYTU6J

User avatar
Moosey
Posts: 3177
Joined: January 27th, 2019, 5:54 pm
Location: A house, or perhaps the OCA board. Or [click to not expand]
Contact:

Re: Reflectorless Rotating Oscillator Discussion Thread in Life

Post by Moosey » June 24th, 2019, 8:13 am

GUYTU6J wrote:Sorry for necroposting.Could we just construct a RRO entirely composed of gliders with this naive idea?
1.Start with the all-glider phase.The 1st glider hits the 2nd glider, which creates an elbow.
2.The following slow salvo constructs the freeze-dried salvo of the whole RRO.
3.The last glider triggers the seed, regenerating the original all-glider phase but at another orientation.
Could we make more with less in step 2? And would it be easier to regenerate at another orientation than at original orientation(possibly with displacement)?
EDIT:The step 3 could have trouble with the order of seed actication.
I think that’s probably possible, but it would be large in terms of cell count. The alternative would, of course, be a very large (in bounding box) 175-cell RRO, which would certainly be possible and would also be smaller, but it’s also not as interesting an idea. However, your idea is better, in my opinion, than just calling on RCT-magic. I think
I wrote:Dvgrn probably has a better answer that’s also conveniently divided up into sections.
I am a prolific creator of many rather pathetic googological functions

My CA rules can be found here

Also, the tree game
Bill Watterson once wrote: "How do soldiers killing each other solve the world's problems?"

User avatar
dvgrn
Moderator
Posts: 6497
Joined: May 17th, 2009, 11:00 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: Reflectorless Rotating Oscillator Discussion Thread in Life

Post by dvgrn » June 24th, 2019, 8:32 am

GUYTU6J wrote:1.Start with the all-glider phase.The 1st glider hits the 2nd glider, which creates an elbow.
2.The following slow salvo constructs the freeze-dried salvo of the whole RRO.
3.The last glider triggers the seed, regenerating the original all-glider phase but at another orientation.
Could we make more with less in step 2?
Not in any simple way, I'm afraid. With current technology you'll need at least five or ten gliders per freeze-dried still life, and let's say two still lifes per output glider. That adds up to making less with more, not the other way around.

It's hard to imagine an encoding system that can get to "more with less", without building very complex temporary memory loops and switching systems to re-use subrecipes many times. That would be an impressive feat of engineering if someone managed to put it all together; it's still highly non-trivial to come up with a mechanism that ends up reconstituting the exact same recipe that came in.

It's convenient to have two copies of the early part of the recipe, at least -- the part that does all the initial construction. It's hard to see how to encode that initial recipe data to get any kind of decent compression.

Once you have a memory-loop mechanism you could catch the later part of the recipe, make a copy of it while also using it to send out a new copy of the early part of the recipe. Then send the later part of the recipe directly from the memory loop while also triggering a self-destruct sequence on the memory loop mechanism.

But it seems much, much simpler to avoid most of the complicated reconstitution machinery by just having two complete copies of the recipe follow one another. This may be just a failure of imagination on my part, though. If so, I'll be very interested to see what someone constructs to improve on the two-copies-of-recipe design.

User avatar
Gustone
Posts: 613
Joined: March 6th, 2019, 2:26 am

Re: Reflectorless Rotating Oscillator Discussion Thread in Life

Post by Gustone » June 25th, 2019, 11:21 am

What about ELEMENTARY rro?
My favourite oscillator of all time

Code: Select all

x = 15, y = 13, rule = B3/S23
7bo2$3b2o5b2o$b2o4bo4b2o$5b2ob2o$bobo7bobo$bo2bobobobo2bo$5obobob5o$o
4bo3bo4bo$b3obobobob3o$3bob2obo2bo$8bobo$8b2o!

User avatar
Moosey
Posts: 3177
Joined: January 27th, 2019, 5:54 pm
Location: A house, or perhaps the OCA board. Or [click to not expand]
Contact:

Re: Reflectorless Rotating Oscillator Discussion Thread in Life

Post by Moosey » June 25th, 2019, 11:29 am

Gustone wrote:What about ELEMENTARY rro?
Currently it looks like (small ones) don't exist-- they'd be large statorless high-period oscillators.
I am a prolific creator of many rather pathetic googological functions

My CA rules can be found here

Also, the tree game
Bill Watterson once wrote: "How do soldiers killing each other solve the world's problems?"

Post Reply