Scorbie wrote:Before I invest search time: Is it practical to search for a superfast 2G_odd->X for the new singleton glider mechanism?... So that you could achieve proximity at the cost of parity.

Sorry, didn't notice this question a few days ago -- and I'm not sure I understand it now. This would be part of a memory loop circuit holding a single-lane construction recipe? Maybe with a recovery time less than 90?

For there to be parity issues, it seems like the leading glider would have to be produced by some kind of gun -- but a p120 gun would be too slow, and any faster gun would limit the relative timings of gliders in the single-lane recipe, which I _think_ would more than erase any gains from a faster circuit. So I'm probably guessing wrong and you're not thinking about a gun.

If you're planning to generate tandem gliders to populate a recipe memory loop, then maybe it makes sense to start at the transmission side instead of the receiving side. If a tandem-glider output can be found, in the H-to-Gn stamp collection or elsewhere, that has a low recovery time

and makes a likely looking active reaction out of the blinker, then it might make sense to run a search based on that.

In that situation there wouldn't be any parity issues, because the tandem gliders would have a fixed relative position -- the first glider makes the blinker and the second one operates on it and gets back to stable again. Pretend example:

Code: Select all

```
x = 64, y = 64, rule = LifeHistory
17.D3.D.D3.D2.3D4.D3.5D3.D4.3D3.3D$17.2D2.D.D3.D.D3.D2.2D5.D4.2D3.D3.
D.D3.D$17.D.D.D.D3.D5.D3.D5.D5.D7.D.D2.2D$17.D2.2D.D.D.D3.2D4.D5.D5.D
6.D2.D.D.D$17.D3.D.D.D.D5.D3.D5.D5.D5.D3.2D2.D$17.D3.D.2D.2D.D3.D3.D
5.D5.D4.D4.D3.D$17.D3.D.D3.D2.3D3.3D4.D4.3D2.5D2.3D4$17.D3.D.D3.D2.3D
2.5D.5D3.D4.3D3.3D$17.2D2.D.D3.D.D3.D.D7.D4.2D3.D3.D.D$17.D.D.D.D3.D
5.D.D7.D5.D7.D.D$17.D2.2D.D.D.D4.D3.3D4.D5.D6.D2.4D$17.D3.D.D.D.D3.D
7.D3.D5.D5.D3.D3.D$17.D3.D.2D.2D2.D4.D3.D3.D5.D4.D4.D3.D$17.D3.D.D3.D
.5D2.3D4.D4.3D2.5D2.3D8$51.A$29.2A9.2A7.3A$27.2B2AB7.B2AB5.A$27.4B5.
2B2.3B5.2A$26.7B2.7B.B.5B$27.21B$26.23B$24.25B$23.27B$22.28B$21.29B$
20.4B2.22B.B2A.A$19.4B2.4B.16B3.B2AB3A$19.3B2.4B3.2B.10B7.B4.A$19.2B
2.4B9.7B7.2A.3A$19.B2.4B9.11B5.A.A$21.4B10.12B4.A.A$20.4B11.12B5.A$
19.4B13.11B$A18.3B12.4B.4B3CB$3A31.2A4.4BC2B$3.A31.A4.2B3C2B$2.2A28.
3A6.6B$32.A8.7B$43.B.4B$46.4B$47.4B$2A46.2B2A$2A3.A43.BA.A$4.A.A45.A$
4.A2.A44.2A$5.2A2$8.A2.A$8.4A$5.A$5.5A$9.A$7.A$7.2A!
```

This H-to-Gn definitely doesn't work, but it has a nice recovery time (80) and there wouldn't be any parity issues if it did work -- the next tandem glider could have even or odd relative timing.

I suppose you'd have parity problems if you applied the gliders in the other order -- first one hits blinker and makes an output signal, second one restores the blinker. That could work if the tandem gliders were farther apart. But in that case is it likely that the tandem glider transmitter would recover in less than 90 ticks?

If the transmitter were big and complicated and included an edge shooter for the second glider, it could easily recover in say 78 ticks... but that would be a pain to use in self-constructing circuitry, for sure, and then we still have the parity problem, to say nothing of the chirality problem.

(Chirality problem = only one of the two mirror-image orientations of the tandem-glider transmitter will work. By Murphy's Law, usually this turns out to be a horrible layout headache.)

I think we'll just have to re-run toolkit searches for each actual transceiver we find, to see if there's a universal set of one-lane construction elbow operations. It's certainly plausible that if we could handle signals spaced 60+2N ticks apart, the faster recovery time would make up for the parity problem. I kind of doubt that we'd do more than barely break even in that case, but we're going to have to put together a dedicated search program to find out for sure.

We need the search program anyway, to see how far simeks' toolkit can be extended! More elbow ops are certainly out there waiting, and probably more elbow types as well.