Star Wars Rule

For discussion of other cellular automata.
User avatar
ColorfulGalaxy
Posts: 407
Joined: July 16th, 2020, 3:37 am
Location: Hacked by Trump {Bot}

Re: Thread For Your Accidental Discoveries

Post by ColorfulGalaxy » July 27th, 2020, 7:49 am

Some examples of agar in Star Wars:
(Note: I put them on torus)

Code: Select all

x = 0, y = 0, rule = 345/2/4:T4,4
2.2A$2A$2.2A$2A!
Honeybox Agar

Code: Select all

x = 0, y = 0, rule = 345/2/4:T3,3
.A$3A$.A!
Chocolate Agar

Code: Select all

x = 0, y = 0, rule = 345/2/4:T4,4
.A.A$A.A$.A.A$A.A!
Checkerboard Agar

Code: Select all

x = 0, y = 0, rule = 345/2/4:T4,4
2.2A$2.2A$2A$2A!
Big Checker Agar

Code: Select all

x = 0, y = 0, rule = 345/2/4:T4,4
4A$4A$$!
Venetian blinds

Code: Select all

x = 0, y = 0, rule = 345/2/4:T3,3
.2A$A$A!
Marshland Agar

Code: Select all

x = 8, y = 8, rule = 345/2/4:T4
2.2A$1.2A$2A$A2.A!
Y-stripes Agar
Last edited by ColorfulGalaxy on August 5th, 2020, 5:35 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
JP21
Posts: 1870
Joined: October 26th, 2019, 5:39 am
Location: PH

Re: Star Wars Rule

Post by JP21 » August 5th, 2020, 3:56 am

I found something unbelievable at first hand, but it's actually something obvious and boring.

Code: Select all

x = 8, y = 8, rule = 345/2/4
4.B$2.A.2A$.3A.2A$2.A3.AB$BA3.A$.2A.3A$2.2A.A$3.B!
I never saw or knew it before.

User avatar
FWKnightship
Posts: 1464
Joined: June 23rd, 2019, 3:10 am
Location: Hey,wait!! Where am I!? Help! Somebody help!I'm lost!!

Re: Star Wars Rule

Post by FWKnightship » November 18th, 2020, 1:03 am

Code: Select all

x = 175, y = 117, rule = 345/2/4
118.A22.A$117.3A20.3A$118.A22.A2$122.A14.A$121.3A12.3A$122.A14.A3$68.
A$67.3A$68.A$84.A6.A6.A6.A6.A$72.A10.3A4.3A4.3A4.3A4.3A$71.3A10.A6.A
6.A6.A6.A15.A$72.A11.A6.A6.A6.A6.A14.3A$83.3A4.3A4.3A4.3A4.3A14.A$84.
A6.A6.A6.A6.A13$65.A7.A36.A12.A$.A54.A7.3A5.3A26.A7.3A10.3A$3A52.3A7.
A7.A26.3A7.A12.A$.A54.A44.A$77.A49.A$5.A46.A23.3A7.A10.A28.3A$4.3A44.
3A23.A7.3A8.3A28.A$5.A46.A33.A10.A8$98.A2.A2.A2.A$97.12A$98.A2.A2.A2.
A5$97.A2.A2.A2.A$96.12A$97.A2.A2.A2.A5$136.A$135.3A6.A$136.A6.3A$68.A
11.A14.A48.A$67.3A4.A4.3A4.A7.3A8.A26.A11.A$51.A16.A4.3A4.A4.3A7.A8.
3A24.3A9.3A$50.3A21.A11.A18.A26.A11.A$51.A53.A38.A$104.3A36.3A$47.A
52.A2.2A.2A36.A15.A$46.3A41.A2.A5.5A.2A37.A14.3A$47.A41.6A5.A2.3A37.
3A14.A$90.A2.A10.A39.A15.A$144.A15.2A$143.3A14.A$144.A15.A$91.A2.A2.A
7.A53.2A$90.9A5.3A53.A$91.A2.A2.A7.A54.A2.A2.A2.A2.A$159.15A$132.A11.
A15.A11.A$131.3A9.3A$104.A27.A11.A$103.3A38.A18.A2.A$104.A31.A6.3A16.
6A$135.3A6.A18.A3.2A$136.A26.A4.2A$162.2A5.2A$93.A5.A2.A60.A5.A$92.
12A59.A5.A$93.A2.A5.A59.9A$102.A60.A2.A2.A$102.2A$102.A$102.A4.A2.A2.
A$101.2A3.9A$102.A4.A5.A$102.A4.A5.A$101.2A3.2A5.2A$102.A4.2A4.A$102.
A5.2A3.A23.A$101.2A6.6A21.3A$102.A7.A2.A23.A$102.A$101.3A37.A$102.A
37.3A$141.A5$5.A71.ABC89.A$4.3A70.ABC88.3A$5.A163.A2$.A171.A$3A169.3A
$.A171.A!
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
AttributeError: 'FWKnightship' object has no attribute 'signature'

Naszvadi
Posts: 1244
Joined: May 7th, 2016, 8:53 am
Contact:

Re: Star Wars Rule

Post by Naszvadi » November 18th, 2020, 10:28 am

FWKnightship wrote:
November 18th, 2020, 1:03 am

Code: Select all

x = 175, y = 117, rule = 345/2/4
118.A22.A$117.3A20.3A$118.A22.A2$122.A14.A$121.3A12.3A$122.A14.A3$68.
A$67.3A$68.A$84.A6.A6.A6.A6.A$72.A10.3A4.3A4.3A4.3A4.3A$71.3A10.A6.A
6.A6.A6.A15.A$72.A11.A6.A6.A6.A6.A14.3A$83.3A4.3A4.3A4.3A4.3A14.A$84.
A6.A6.A6.A6.A13$65.A7.A36.A12.A$.A54.A7.3A5.3A26.A7.3A10.3A$3A52.3A7.
A7.A26.3A7.A12.A$.A54.A44.A$77.A49.A$5.A46.A23.3A7.A10.A28.3A$4.3A44.
3A23.A7.3A8.3A28.A$5.A46.A33.A10.A8$98.A2.A2.A2.A$97.12A$98.A2.A2.A2.
A5$97.A2.A2.A2.A$96.12A$97.A2.A2.A2.A5$136.A$135.3A6.A$136.A6.3A$68.A
11.A14.A48.A$67.3A4.A4.3A4.A7.3A8.A26.A11.A$51.A16.A4.3A4.A4.3A7.A8.
3A24.3A9.3A$50.3A21.A11.A18.A26.A11.A$51.A53.A38.A$104.3A36.3A$47.A
52.A2.2A.2A36.A15.A$46.3A41.A2.A5.5A.2A37.A14.3A$47.A41.6A5.A2.3A37.
3A14.A$90.A2.A10.A39.A15.A$144.A15.2A$143.3A14.A$144.A15.A$91.A2.A2.A
7.A53.2A$90.9A5.3A53.A$91.A2.A2.A7.A54.A2.A2.A2.A2.A$159.15A$132.A11.
A15.A11.A$131.3A9.3A$104.A27.A11.A$103.3A38.A18.A2.A$104.A31.A6.3A16.
6A$135.3A6.A18.A3.2A$136.A26.A4.2A$162.2A5.2A$93.A5.A2.A60.A5.A$92.
12A59.A5.A$93.A2.A5.A59.9A$102.A60.A2.A2.A$102.2A$102.A$102.A4.A2.A2.
A$101.2A3.9A$102.A4.A5.A$102.A4.A5.A$101.2A3.2A5.2A$102.A4.2A4.A$102.
A5.2A3.A23.A$101.2A6.6A21.3A$102.A7.A2.A23.A$102.A$101.3A37.A$102.A
37.3A$141.A5$5.A71.ABC89.A$4.3A70.ABC88.3A$5.A163.A2$.A171.A$3A169.3A
$.A171.A!
Congrats! A W110 "rosary" pattern. I wonder how to avoid doppler-effect if a spaceship is applied as a 180degree signal reflector... Due to the novel tricks, this is also a POTY candidate!

User avatar
ColorfulGalaxy
Posts: 407
Joined: July 16th, 2020, 3:37 am
Location: Hacked by Trump {Bot}

Re: Star Wars Rule

Post by ColorfulGalaxy » November 21st, 2020, 1:08 am

FWKnightship wrote:
November 18th, 2020, 1:03 am

Code: Select all

x = 175, y = 117, rule = 345/2/4
118.A22.A$117.3A20.3A$118.A22.A2$122.A14.A$121.3A12.3A$122.A14.A3$68.
A$67.3A$68.A$84.A6.A6.A6.A6.A$72.A10.3A4.3A4.3A4.3A4.3A$71.3A10.A6.A
6.A6.A6.A15.A$72.A11.A6.A6.A6.A6.A14.3A$83.3A4.3A4.3A4.3A4.3A14.A$84.
A6.A6.A6.A6.A13$65.A7.A36.A12.A$.A54.A7.3A5.3A26.A7.3A10.3A$3A52.3A7.
A7.A26.3A7.A12.A$.A54.A44.A$77.A49.A$5.A46.A23.3A7.A10.A28.3A$4.3A44.
3A23.A7.3A8.3A28.A$5.A46.A33.A10.A8$98.A2.A2.A2.A$97.12A$98.A2.A2.A2.
A5$97.A2.A2.A2.A$96.12A$97.A2.A2.A2.A5$136.A$135.3A6.A$136.A6.3A$68.A
11.A14.A48.A$67.3A4.A4.3A4.A7.3A8.A26.A11.A$51.A16.A4.3A4.A4.3A7.A8.
3A24.3A9.3A$50.3A21.A11.A18.A26.A11.A$51.A53.A38.A$104.3A36.3A$47.A
52.A2.2A.2A36.A15.A$46.3A41.A2.A5.5A.2A37.A14.3A$47.A41.6A5.A2.3A37.
3A14.A$90.A2.A10.A39.A15.A$144.A15.2A$143.3A14.A$144.A15.A$91.A2.A2.A
7.A53.2A$90.9A5.3A53.A$91.A2.A2.A7.A54.A2.A2.A2.A2.A$159.15A$132.A11.
A15.A11.A$131.3A9.3A$104.A27.A11.A$103.3A38.A18.A2.A$104.A31.A6.3A16.
6A$135.3A6.A18.A3.2A$136.A26.A4.2A$162.2A5.2A$93.A5.A2.A60.A5.A$92.
12A59.A5.A$93.A2.A5.A59.9A$102.A60.A2.A2.A$102.2A$102.A$102.A4.A2.A2.
A$101.2A3.9A$102.A4.A5.A$102.A4.A5.A$101.2A3.2A5.2A$102.A4.2A4.A$102.
A5.2A3.A23.A$101.2A6.6A21.3A$102.A7.A2.A23.A$102.A$101.3A37.A$102.A
37.3A$141.A5$5.A71.ABC89.A$4.3A70.ABC88.3A$5.A163.A2$.A171.A$3A169.3A
$.A171.A!
Is that a Rule 110 cycle?
Is Star Wars Rule Turing Complete?

ENORMOUS_NAME
Posts: 311
Joined: August 8th, 2020, 6:39 pm
Location: idk

Re: Star Wars Rule

Post by ENORMOUS_NAME » November 22nd, 2020, 12:25 pm

Some guns

Code: Select all

x = 506, y = 195, rule = 345/2/4
52$262.A$261.BCBA$114.C145.C2.A$260.A.3A$111.BC.A.CB140.CAB2A.2A$110.
C2.3A.CA138.B.A2.3A21.A$109.B.3A.2A.B4.CBA131.4A2.A21.3A$108.A.A2.3A2.
C4.CBA11.A121.A.2CB.C20.A$109.3AC.A.B5.CBA11.3A119.CBA2BA$108.C.A2.A.
C21.A121.A2.A$109.BA2.CB$112.CBA$110.2CBA$110.2BA$110.2A4$24.A.A.A47.
C.A$24.B3AB46.B.A.B$24.C.A2.C17.ABC6.ABC4.ABC9.4A.C$26.C2BC17.ABC5.AB
C5.ABC5.C3.A.A.A.B$27.2A19.ABC2.ABC.ABC15.ABC.A.CA345.A$49.ABC.ABC2.A
BC14.AB.3A.B344.3A$50.ABC.ABC19.3A.3A345.A$76.C.3A$76.BC.A2$77.C$428.
CA$428.A.B$425.A.3AC$110.2C313.B2A.A$110.2B313.C.3A$110.2A318.A.A$426.
BC.3AB.CB$426.AC2.A2.A.C$113.C313.A.2A.3A$112.CB312.4A.2A.A$110.C.BA277.
AB31.C2A.A.A2.2A$110.BCA278.A.C28.AB2.3A.A3.A$110.AB2.C275.3A30.A.2A3.
5A$111.A2CB276.A30.4A.4A3.A$112.2BA275.CBA30.A2.A2.A3.2A.BA$112.2A84.
A.A222.A.2A2.A4.2ACB.C$114.C83.B3A220.C.2A.A.A.A.2A2.C2.B$77.A35.CB83.
C.A221.BC.9A.A2.CAC$76.3A33.CBA308.AB.A3.A2.CBA2CB$77.A32.2CBA311.A7.
ABA.BA$110.2BA322.C$110.2A$170.CBA13.A$112.2A57.CBA11.3A$112.2B59.CBA
10.A$112.2C60.CBA9.A$176.CBA6.2A$176.CBA7.A77.A$175.CBA8.A76.3A$110.C
.A.BC11.CBA3.CBA49.3A76.A$110.B3A13.CBA3.CBA22.CBA25.A$110.A.A45.CBA27$
259.A$258.3A$259.A!

https://www.conwaylife.com/forums/viewt ... 34#p111934

Code: Select all

x = 12, y = 5, rule = Symbiosis
10.B$10.A$3A6.A.A$A.A7.A$A.A7.B! 

Code: Select all

x = 10, y = 13, rule = Symbiosis
BA$.A$2.B2$3.B$3.A$3.A$2.B2A2.2A$4.A2.A.A$.B2A3.A$2.A$2.A$2.B! 

User avatar
Heavpoot
Posts: 45
Joined: August 4th, 2018, 3:58 pm
Contact:

population plot in a 1024x1024 torus

Post by Heavpoot » November 23rd, 2020, 7:49 pm

untitled.png
untitled.png (21.63 KiB) Viewed 7782 times
this is due to the formation of ever-larger highly resistant structures, usually still lives with oscillating parts/guns/reflectors on the outside
these can be destroyed but seem to have a tendency to grow larger
this leads to the question of the existence of an indestructable pattern in star wars, has this already been demonstrated?

Yoel
Posts: 384
Joined: July 2nd, 2020, 1:02 am
Location: Electronic jungle
Contact:

Re: Star Wars Rule

Post by Yoel » November 29th, 2020, 9:16 pm

ColorfulGalaxy wrote:
November 21st, 2020, 1:08 am
Is that a Rule 110 cycle?
Is Star Wars Rule Turing Complete?
Rules with photons or similar c/1 or cn/n ships are expected to be Turing-complete. Probably even Seeds, although I have not seen a splitter and reflector in Seeds yet.

User avatar
Moosey
Posts: 4306
Joined: January 27th, 2019, 5:54 pm
Location: here
Contact:

Re: Star Wars Rule

Post by Moosey » December 3rd, 2020, 8:45 am

Yoel wrote:
November 29th, 2020, 9:16 pm
ColorfulGalaxy wrote:
November 21st, 2020, 1:08 am
Is that a Rule 110 cycle?
Is Star Wars Rule Turing Complete?
Rules with photons or similar c/1 or cn/n ships are expected to be Turing-complete. Probably even Seeds, although I have not seen a splitter and reflector in Seeds yet.
Um, what? (1) why would the velocity of the ship possibly matter? (2) why would having a ship of sufficient velocity in any way make you expect a rule is TC?
not active here but active on discord

Hunting
Posts: 4395
Joined: September 11th, 2017, 2:54 am

Re: Star Wars Rule

Post by Hunting » December 3rd, 2020, 8:03 pm

Moosey wrote:
December 3rd, 2020, 8:45 am
Yoel wrote:
November 29th, 2020, 9:16 pm
ColorfulGalaxy wrote:
November 21st, 2020, 1:08 am
Is that a Rule 110 cycle?
Is Star Wars Rule Turing Complete?
Rules with photons or similar c/1 or cn/n ships are expected to be Turing-complete. Probably even Seeds, although I have not seen a splitter and reflector in Seeds yet.
Um, what? (1) why would the velocity of the ship possibly matter? (2) why would having a ship of sufficient velocity in any way make you expect a rule is TC?
Yeah, how do you expect that? Yoel seems to have a lot of trouble understanding TCness, considering his "the splitter-annihilation is not sufficient" argument.

Naszvadi
Posts: 1244
Joined: May 7th, 2016, 8:53 am
Contact:

Re: Star Wars Rule

Post by Naszvadi » December 4th, 2020, 8:00 am

Hunting wrote:
December 3rd, 2020, 8:03 pm
Moosey wrote:
December 3rd, 2020, 8:45 am
Yoel wrote:
November 29th, 2020, 9:16 pm


Rules with photons or similar c/1 or cn/n ships are expected to be Turing-complete. Probably even Seeds, although I have not seen a splitter and reflector in Seeds yet.
Um, what? (1) why would the velocity of the ship possibly matter? (2) why would having a ship of sufficient velocity in any way make you expect a rule is TC?
Yeah, how do you expect that? Yoel seems to have a lot of trouble understanding TCness, considering his "the splitter-annihilation is not sufficient" argument.
To catch it, even the (amazing) unstrechable bead-"rosary" pattern that simulates a bounded W110 loop is weaker than an infinite tiling composed of unit cells or stripes! The latter proves Turing-completeness if infinite tilings are allowed and the input tilings could be generated AND all results can be evaluated using only certain simple arithmetics; with these constraints, W110 unit cells decides the Halting-problem.

What's the problem with "paracompact" unit cells, the so-called unit stripes?

Yoel
Posts: 384
Joined: July 2nd, 2020, 1:02 am
Location: Electronic jungle
Contact:

Re: Star Wars Rule

Post by Yoel » December 4th, 2020, 9:17 am

Moosey wrote:
December 3rd, 2020, 8:45 am
Yoel wrote:
November 29th, 2020, 9:16 pm
ColorfulGalaxy wrote:
November 21st, 2020, 1:08 am
Is that a Rule 110 cycle?
Is Star Wars Rule Turing Complete?
Rules with photons or similar c/1 or cn/n ships are expected to be Turing-complete. Probably even Seeds, although I have not seen a splitter and reflector in Seeds yet.
Um, what? (1) why would the velocity of the ship possibly matter? (2) why would having a ship of sufficient velocity in any way make you expect a rule is TC?
The ship velocity does not matter, but the typical photon-to-photon reaction that acts like an AND-NOT gate does. Reproducing the same with other types of spaceships is not trivial and often is impossible.
Last edited by Yoel on December 4th, 2020, 9:33 am, edited 2 times in total.

Yoel
Posts: 384
Joined: July 2nd, 2020, 1:02 am
Location: Electronic jungle
Contact:

Re: Star Wars Rule

Post by Yoel » December 4th, 2020, 9:30 am

Hunting wrote:
December 3rd, 2020, 8:03 pm
Moosey wrote:
December 3rd, 2020, 8:45 am
Yoel wrote:
November 29th, 2020, 9:16 pm


Rules with photons or similar c/1 or cn/n ships are expected to be Turing-complete. Probably even Seeds, although I have not seen a splitter and reflector in Seeds yet.
Um, what? (1) why would the velocity of the ship possibly matter? (2) why would having a ship of sufficient velocity in any way make you expect a rule is TC?
Yeah, how do you expect that? Yoel seems to have a lot of trouble understanding TCness, considering his "the splitter-annihilation is not sufficient" argument.
OK, provide a rigorous mathematical proof that the splitter-annihilation is sufficient for every possible rule or a script that automatically produces a proper Rule 110 unit for any such rule.

Several groups of university professors are struggling to prove already for about a dozen of years that Rule 54 is Turing-complete. It has reflectors, it has splitters, it has AND-NOT annihilation reactions. Unfortunately, it may count as a good reason to believe that it's TC, but not a strict proof. Sorry.

Hunting
Posts: 4395
Joined: September 11th, 2017, 2:54 am

Re: Star Wars Rule

Post by Hunting » December 4th, 2020, 9:48 am

Yoel wrote:
December 4th, 2020, 9:17 am
Moosey wrote:
December 3rd, 2020, 8:45 am
Yoel wrote:
November 29th, 2020, 9:16 pm


Rules with photons or similar c/1 or cn/n ships are expected to be Turing-complete. Probably even Seeds, although I have not seen a splitter and reflector in Seeds yet.
Um, what? (1) why would the velocity of the ship possibly matter? (2) why would having a ship of sufficient velocity in any way make you expect a rule is TC?
The ship velocity does not matter, but the typical photon-to-photon reaction that acts like an AND-NOT gate does. Reproducing the same with other types of spaceships is not trivial and often is impossible.
That's the typical reaction in pretty much every non-explosive rule with a common spaceship. 99% of B2a rules don't have a splitter.

Hunting
Posts: 4395
Joined: September 11th, 2017, 2:54 am

Re: Star Wars Rule

Post by Hunting » December 4th, 2020, 9:49 am

Yoel wrote:
December 4th, 2020, 9:30 am
Rule 54
That's because it is 1D and it doesn't even have a crossover.

Yoel
Posts: 384
Joined: July 2nd, 2020, 1:02 am
Location: Electronic jungle
Contact:

Re: Star Wars Rule

Post by Yoel » December 5th, 2020, 11:15 am

Hunting wrote:
December 4th, 2020, 9:48 am
That's the typical reaction in pretty much every non-explosive rule with a common spaceship. 99% of B2a rules don't have a splitter.
I mean the asymmetrical diagonal reaction, in which one spaceship remains intact or modified, while the second one disappears entirely. I don't think it's typical for rules with slower common gliders/ships. Given guns of usable period (say, p>=13, suitable for crossover photon signals), such reactions can be used as a reverse reflector and an orthogonal splitter, which leads to AND and NAND gates. The velocity does matter here, because photons are, probably, the most stable spaceships in existence. When they touch something only by their "tail", they don't stop propagating, although they may explode or transform into something unusable like a puffer. Such reactions may be also used for things like memory units etc. Here is a simple example from my rule Lace (B2ae/S1e3y5):

Code: Select all

x = 197, y = 99, rule = B2ae/S1e3y5
8$101bo$102bo4$101b2o5$104bo$102bo2bo$32bo67bobo$31bo69b2o$105bobo$
108bo$31b2o20bo51bo$31b2o19bo45bo9bo5bo31bo$31b2o57bo2b3o3bo15bo31bo
27bo$89bo3b3o3bo15bo31bo26bo$114bo31bo$30bo21b2o46bo$31b2o2bo63bo$25bo
8bo$13bo4bo7bo$14bo3bo5b3o$50bo$23bo18bo6bo2bo$24bo2bobo13bo8bobo$52b
2o$27bo19bobo60b2o$28bobo15bo62bo2bo$49bo$46bo9bo$23bo31bo3b3o2bo$24bo
30bo3b3o3bo2$54bo$55bo4$19bo$20bo$50bo31bo31bo31bo$9bo3b3o3bo31bo31bo
31bo31bo27bo$10bo2b3o3bo31bo31bo31bo31bo26bo$18bo9bo21bo31bo31bo31bo$
25bo$28bo15bobo$25bobo19bo65bobo$21b2o89bo$20bobo22bobo2bo64bo$22bo2bo
4bo2bo17bo60bobo4bo$24bo6b2o77b2o6bo$48b3o5bo3bo48bo2bo$32bo15bo7bo4bo
57bo3b3o3bo$31bo8bo8bo69bo3b3o2bo$39bo2b2o63bo12bo$21b2o21bo63bo3$42b
2o66b2o$22bo19b2o65bo2bo$21bo20b2o66b2o$109bo2bo$110b2o$43bo$42bo67bo$
111bo!
I didn't explore this rule much. I suspect it has an oscillator-based splitter. I just want to demonstrate what I mean. As you may have noticed in my posts on this forum, I focus almost entirely on B2 or B2a rules, but mainly on Generations and my cyclical "colorful" rules.

As for 99% of B2a rules... who knows? It's hard to strictly prove that something does not exist in CA. Very few rules like B1/S are conclusively proven to be not Turing-complete. I was very surprised, when I discovered Jason Summers' pattern collection for Seeds. I always thought that Seeds is only useful as a starting point for tweaking it into something less chaotic. Yet, it had guns, puffers, rakes etc. If someone discovers slower guns in Seeds, logic circuits would be the next step.

I admit I used circular logic in my conjecture about B2 rules. I only notice what I consider "interesting", something that has a taste of Brian's Brain, Starwars or my Fireworld. The other 99%, if your estimation is correct, I simply disregard and forget about them. :D
Last edited by Yoel on December 5th, 2020, 12:28 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Hunting
Posts: 4395
Joined: September 11th, 2017, 2:54 am

Re: Star Wars Rule

Post by Hunting » December 5th, 2020, 11:36 am

Yoel wrote:
December 5th, 2020, 11:15 am
Hunting wrote:
December 4th, 2020, 9:48 am
That's the typical reaction in pretty much every non-explosive rule with a common spaceship. 99% of B2a rules don't have a splitter.
I mean the asymmetrical diagonal reaction, in which one spaceship remains intact or modified, while the second one disappears entirely. I don't think it's typical for rules with slower common gliders/ships.
I didn't explode this rule much.
1. That depends. Some glider rules without many birth conditions also allow such flyby deletion, but most rules have at least one 2G-to-G reaction anyway (LeapLife have 3).
2. Seeds is not TC anyway, because its exploding nature doesn't even allow a period multiplier. The best you can do is ultraweak TCness within an agar.
3. Nice typo
4. You can't except most rules with a lightspeed spaceship (which is an unusually large range and contains mostly badly-explosive rules) to have a gun and a crossover.

Yoel
Posts: 384
Joined: July 2nd, 2020, 1:02 am
Location: Electronic jungle
Contact:

Re: Star Wars Rule

Post by Yoel » December 5th, 2020, 12:08 pm

Hunting wrote:
December 4th, 2020, 9:49 am
Yoel wrote:
December 4th, 2020, 9:30 am
Rule 54
That's because it is 1D and it doesn't even have a crossover.
I anticipated this argument. It does have "crossovers" similar to Rule 110. Some "gliders" (moving agar disruptions) pass though each other, but usually get modified in the process. Much worse, and rarely seen in Rule 110, is the tendency of disrupting the agar phase itself after such reactions. Also, most interesting "gliders" in Rule 54 appear as disruptions of custom agars produced by gun-like structures, i.e. as disruptions over disruptions. Because of this mess, it's difficult to construct something more interesting than a couple of logic gates. I used to play with this rule a long time ago, but gave up on it. In MCell it was called "Brownian motion", and for a good reason...

Of course it's a very extreme case. But they might still be B2a rules that have all the details for supposed Turing-completeness, but no way to wire things together due to some strict synchronization issues. If I am wrong, I would love to see a mathematical proof that wiring is always possible. Such proof could even lead, in theory, to automatic CAD-like construction of optimized Rule 110 units or even computers...

Yoel
Posts: 384
Joined: July 2nd, 2020, 1:02 am
Location: Electronic jungle
Contact:

Re: Star Wars Rule

Post by Yoel » December 5th, 2020, 12:26 pm

Hunting wrote:
December 5th, 2020, 11:36 am
Yoel wrote:
December 5th, 2020, 11:15 am
Hunting wrote:
December 4th, 2020, 9:48 am
That's the typical reaction in pretty much every non-explosive rule with a common spaceship. 99% of B2a rules don't have a splitter.
I mean the asymmetrical diagonal reaction, in which one spaceship remains intact or modified, while the second one disappears entirely. I don't think it's typical for rules with slower common gliders/ships.
I didn't explode this rule much.
1. That depends. Some glider rules without many birth conditions also allow such flyby deletion, but most rules have at least one 2G-to-G reaction anyway (LeapLife have 3).
2. Seeds is not TC anyway, because its exploding nature doesn't even allow a period multiplier. The best you can do is ultraweak TCness within an agar.
3. Nice typo
4. You can't except most rules with a lightspeed spaceship (which is an unusually large range and contains mostly badly-explosive rules) to have a gun and a crossover.
Exploding nature in itself is not a problem. Several of my rules are as explosive as Seeds (and based on Seeds), but do have stable or oscillator-based p2 reflectors and splitters. Period doublers are not necessary, in principle. One slow gun might be enough. It might also be possible to construct a moving rake-based Rule 110 unit, as someone suggested for Brian's Brain (proven to be totally unnecessary; BB is a nice-behaving rule exceptionally rich in useful reactions).

Well, a crossover in 2D CA is just a fact of life. The problem is to create a gun slow enough to have crossing-over spaceship streams. As I've mentioned above, I meant "interesting" rules like Starwars. Of course, something like B2/S23456 is good for nothing (besides simulating crystal growth, perhaps).

Hunting
Posts: 4395
Joined: September 11th, 2017, 2:54 am

Re: Star Wars Rule

Post by Hunting » December 19th, 2020, 9:20 am

Yoel wrote:
December 4th, 2020, 9:30 am
a script that automatically produces a proper Rule 110 unit for any such rule.
This is trivial as long as you have a way to canonise signals, which is very difficult - different rules have different kind of signals, spaceships, wire signals, wickstrechers, and other bizarre stuff. If you restrict it to stable splitters and orthogonal c/2 spaceships as signals I could do such a script in a minute easily.

1D rules are incomparable to 2D rules especially in circuitry, so shut up or at least stop talking nonsense, and respect other people.

bprentice
Posts: 920
Joined: September 10th, 2009, 6:20 pm
Location: Coos Bay, Oregon

Re: Star Wars Rule

Post by bprentice » December 19th, 2020, 12:44 pm

Hunting wrote:
December 19th, 2020, 9:20 am
If you restrict it to stable splitters and orthogonal c/2 spaceships as signals I could do such a script in a minute easily.
Spend the minute and publish the script.

Brian Prentice

User avatar
bubblegum
Posts: 959
Joined: August 25th, 2019, 11:59 pm
Location: click here to do nothing

Re: Star Wars Rule

Post by bubblegum » December 19th, 2020, 2:22 pm

Hunting wrote:
December 19th, 2020, 9:20 am
shut up or at least stop talking nonsense, and respect other people.
Please do a better job yourself.
Each day is a hidden opportunity, a frozen waterfall that's waiting to be realised, and one that I'll probably be ignoring
sonata wrote:
July 2nd, 2020, 8:33 pm
conwaylife signatures are amazing[citation needed]
anything

ENORMOUS_NAME
Posts: 311
Joined: August 8th, 2020, 6:39 pm
Location: idk

Re: Star Wars Rule

Post by ENORMOUS_NAME » December 19th, 2020, 9:33 pm

Code: Select all

x = 59, y = 79, rule = 345/2/4
26$12.A2.A4.A2.A$11.6A2.6A$12.A2.A4.A2.A$12.A10.A$11.3A.6A.3A11.A2.A4.
A2.A$12.A2.2A2.2A2.A11.6A2.6A$15.A4.A15.A2.A4.A2.A$15.A4.A15.A10.A$15.
2A2.2A14.3A.6A.3A$15.A.2A.A15.A2.2A2.2A2.A$15.2A2.2A18.A4.A$15.A.2A.A
18.A4.A$15.2A2.2A18.2A2.2A$13.3A.2A.3A16.A.2A.A$13.B.2A2.2A.B16.2A2.2A
$13.3A.2A.3A16.A.2A.A$15.2A2.2A18.2A2.2A$15.A.2A.A16.3A.2A.3A$15.2A2.
2A16.B.2A2.2A.B$13.3A.2A.3A14.3A.2A.3A$13.B.2A2.2A.B16.2A2.2A$13.3A.2A
.3A16.A.2A.A$15.2A2.2A18.2A2.2A$15.A.2A.A16.3A.2A.3A$15.2A2.2A16.B.2A
2.2A.B$15.A.2A.A16.3A.2A.3A$15.2A2.2A18.2A2.2A$15.A4.A9.A8.A.2A.A$15.
A4.A8.3A7.2A2.2A$12.A2.2A2.2A2.A6.A8.A.2A.A$11.3A.6A.3A14.2A2.2A$12.A
10.A15.A4.A$12.A2.A4.A2.A15.A4.A$11.6A2.6A11.A2.2A2.2A2.A$12.A2.A4.A2.
A11.3A.6A.3A$36.A10.A$36.A2.A4.A2.A$35.6A2.6A$36.A2.A4.A2.A!

https://www.conwaylife.com/forums/viewt ... 34#p111934

Code: Select all

x = 12, y = 5, rule = Symbiosis
10.B$10.A$3A6.A.A$A.A7.A$A.A7.B! 

Code: Select all

x = 10, y = 13, rule = Symbiosis
BA$.A$2.B2$3.B$3.A$3.A$2.B2A2.2A$4.A2.A.A$.B2A3.A$2.A$2.A$2.B! 

User avatar
JP21
Posts: 1870
Joined: October 26th, 2019, 5:39 am
Location: PH

Re: Star Wars Rule

Post by JP21 » December 19th, 2020, 11:20 pm

Reposting my guns because almost every new posts are just.........

Code: Select all

x = 32, y = 278, rule = 345/2/4
16.BA$16.CA$17.2A$17.A$16.CBA4$16.BA$15.C.A$16.3A$15.3A$15.C.BA5$12.A
.A.C$12.B3AB$11.AC.A2.A$11.B.A.A.A$11.AC2A.3A$12.B.2A.A$12.ABC.CBA$
14.ABA7$4.A.A$.C.3A.B$.B2A.2AC8.CB$.A.3A5.A.A2.A.A$4.A.2A3.B6A$6.3A2.
C.A3.2A$7.A5.CB2.A$6.CBA6.A.A$16.4A$.A8.A6.A.B$12A6.C$.A2.A2.A2.A4$
15.A$14.BCBA$13.C2.A$12.A.4A$12.B2A2.2A$12.C.4A$14.A.A.A$14.C.CB$15.B
A5$7.A$6.4A6.CB$5.C.A.B3.A2.A.A$5.B.A.C2.6A$5.4A2.A.A3.2A$7.A4.BA3.A$
11.C5.A$10.C5.4A$.A8.A6.A.B$12A6.C$.A2.A2.A2.A5$16.A$14.ABCBA$13.BC2.
A$13.C2.3A$17.A$11.CAB2C.A$10.B2.A2.3A.A$10.AC5A.2AB$11.B.A2.3A.C$12.
A4.A5$3.C$2.B.A2.A$2.7A7.CB$4.A.2A5.A2.A.A$7.A.A2.6A$6.3AB3.A3.2A$7.A
.C7.A$9.2BA5.A$9.CA5.4A$.A8.A6.A.B$12A6.C$.A2.A2.A2.A4$19.A2.A$18.6A$
14.A2.2A3.A$13.4A.A$14.A2.2A$14.A.A.AC$13.B4A$15.A.A$14.BC.BC6$11.A2.
A$10.6A.C$9.2A2.A.2A.B$8.A.A2.C2.2A.A$8.B.A2.C3.2A$8.C3A5.A$10.A4.C.A
$15.B3A$15.A.A.A$15.C.CB$16.BA4$16.BA$15.C.A$14.B.3A$13.ACA.A$13.B3.A
.A$12.ACAC3AB$12.B.2A.A2.C$11.A.C.BA.A.A$12.2B.A.5A$12.AC4.A2.2A$18.A
.2A.A$17.A.A2.B$16.2A.2AC$15.C.3A$16.B.A$17.A4$16.BA$15.C.A$16.3AC$
15.3A.B$15.C.A.2A$15.3A.B8.C$16.3AC7.A$15.C.A8.3AC$16.BA9.A5$15.BA$
14.C.CB$13.BA.C2AC$12.A.A.CBA$13.3A.BA$12.C.A.C$13.BA4$14.CB$14.A.C$
15.A.B$14.3A.A$12.3A.2A$12.B.A2.2A$11.AC.A2.A$11.B.2A2.A$10.AC2.A2.3A
$11.B.2A.2A.B$12.C.A.A.C$13.B.A$13.A.A$14.3A$15.A6$16.BA$15.C.A$16.3A
C$15.A.A.B3.C$15.B.A.2A$15.C2A.B.C8.A$17.3A4.A4.3A$16.A.A.6A4.A$17.BC
2.A2.A$18.ABCBA$20.A8$16.BA$15.C.A$11.C2.B.3A$12.ACA2.A$9.C.A.A3.A.A$
9.B9A.B$9.A.A2.A.A.2AC$11.CBA2.3A$17.A$16.CBA4$16.BA$16.CA$17.2A$17.A
$17.A.A$17.2AB$16.B2A$16.A.BA4$17.CB$17.A.A$5.ABA8.3A$2.A2.A.A.C7.A$.
8AB7.A$2.A4.A.A3.A3.2A$2.CB2.BC4.6A.A$13.A2.A.B$17.C5$10.A$9.3A$10.A$
10.A$9.2A2.A.CBA$10.A.B.A2.A$10.A.C6A$9.2A3.A2.A$10.A5.CBA$10.A$8.4A$
8.B.A$9.C6$4.A$.C.3A$B.2A.2A9.CB$3A.2A7.A2.A.A$2.3A.2A4.6A$3.A2.3A4.A
3.2A$7.A9.A$17.A$16.4A$.A8.A6.A.B$12A6.C$.A2.A2.A2.A!
Also, the Star Wars rule doesn't have much extensive collections and it is easy to find many many discoveries from boring to amazing. If only all discoveries can be grouped all together to a very good collection...
[EDIT]
ENORMOUS_NAME wrote:
December 19th, 2020, 9:33 pm

Code: Select all

big gun
.

Code: Select all

x = 13, y = 19, rule = 345/2/4
.A$3A$.A$.A9.A$2A8.3A$.3A7.A$.A.B$4A$.A$.A$2A$.3A$.A.B$.3A$2A$.A$.A$
3A$.A!
[EDIT] Another random discovery:

Code: Select all

x = 53, y = 10, rule = 345/2/4
2.2A45.2A$2.3A43.3A$.3A45.3A$2.ACB43.BCA$2.B2A43.2AB$C5.A.A.A.A.A.A.A
.A.A.A.A.A.A.A.A.A.A.A.A.A.A5.C$2.CBCB.BAB.B.BAB.B.BAB.B.BAB.B.BAB.B.
BAB.B.BAB.BCBC$.BC2ABC.C.CBC.C.CBC.C.CBC.C.CBC.C.CBC.C.CBC.C.CB2ACB$
4.A3.C5.C5.C5.C5.C5.C5.C3.A$4.C43.C!

Yoel
Posts: 384
Joined: July 2nd, 2020, 1:02 am
Location: Electronic jungle
Contact:

Re: Star Wars Rule

Post by Yoel » December 23rd, 2020, 8:00 am

Hunting wrote:
December 19th, 2020, 9:20 am
Yoel wrote:
December 4th, 2020, 9:30 am
a script that automatically produces a proper Rule 110 unit for any such rule.
This is trivial as long as you have a way to canonise signals, which is very difficult - different rules have different kind of signals, spaceships, wire signals, wickstrechers, and other bizarre stuff. If you restrict it to stable splitters and orthogonal c/2 spaceships as signals I could do such a script in a minute easily.

1D rules are incomparable to 2D rules especially in circuitry, so shut up or at least stop talking nonsense, and respect other people.
Please try to comprehend that some people may use terminology slightly different from your personal jargon. I keep telling you already for two months that guns, reflectors, splitters and logic rules are not enough as a proof of Turing-completeness, because different rules have different wiring logistics. Now you are just saying exactly the same thing!!!! You just happen to call them "wire signals".

No, I do not restrict it to stable splitters and orthogonal c/2 spaceships. Why should I? Can you do such a script in a minute way with unstable splitters and 2c/2 photons that get modified in the process of splitting in a variety of way, and change their phases like my multistate rules?

And where in hell did I claim that 1D rules are comparable to 2D rules (besides in some specific limited aspects or with very many states)? Rule110 units are obviously 2D! Emulators of simple synchronized logic gates. You can implement them easily with transistors, which would make them 3D. So what? Your transistors will suddenly become exotic 1D particles or something? Please try to understand your interlocutors next time before making rude comments.

Post Reply