These molecules should "snap together" like those organic chemistry models used in education sets. But if they are then able to organize random configurations of the composing molecules into a shape identical to itself, it could be a lot like what we think biological life's precursor must have been. Take the following where the symbol pairs 'q' and 'b', 'p' and 'd', 'n' and 'u', '[' and ']', and '{' and '}' are each the same shape but in different orientations:

Code: Select all

```
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . [ . } . . . . . . .
. . . . . b u d . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
```

- shape 'b' and shape 'u' always have a tendency to arrange with 'b' on the left hand side of 'u' as it is oriented, when in within the proximity of two spaces in any direction, so that if in generation 1:

Code: Select all

```
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . u . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . b . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
```

Code: Select all

```
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . b u . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
```

- 'u' and 'd' always have a tendency to arrange with 'd' on the right hand side of 'u' as it is oriented when in proximity
- 'd' and '}' always have a tendency to arrange with 'o' above '}' as it is oriented when in proximity
- 'b' and '[' always have a tendency to arrange with 'c' above '[' as it is oriented when in proximity
- Once any of these pairs get into their preferred orientations, they move together as a unit.

- '[' and '}' always have a tendency to arrange such that '{' brackets '[' as it is oriented when in proximity, but this arrangement is not strongly preferred and so does not lock into place or persist if the arrangement is being pulled into a different orientation or location by another affinity

It would tend to form up like this:

Code: Select all

```
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . p n q p n q . . . . . .
. . . { [ ] } [ ] . . . . . .
. . . . b u d b u d . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
```

I know in the above example those are shapes and and not states which is what they would have to be for a rule, but "shapes" could be formed by states that have affinities for other states in orientation when in proximity. Then you just set a big fill, a random distribution of all these states and see how they assemble.

I am really interested to see if this could work.