Freywa (implied) wrote: The blinker is an uninteresting novelty
Freywa (implied) wrote: Sir Robin is an uninteresting novelty
That's not quite what I'm reading as Freywa's implication. Freywa's post was triggered by Entity Valkyrie's question:
Entity Valkyrie wrote:Known??
The crystal and decay mechanism have been known for decades.
But this particular 180-degree reflection quite possibly has never been used before to restart crystal growth.
On the other hand, there doesn't seem to be any reason to learn this new variant, because it uses an unnecessarily complicated method of restarting the crystal growth. Here's Dean Hickerson's version from almost three decades ago -- also using two pipsquirter domino sparks, but in different positions from EV's version, which allows for a much cleaner restart:
Code: Select all
#N Crystal&decay 6600
#C A p150 gun fires at a pair of pentadecathlons. When the first glider
#C hits the PDs, it is reflected back and hits the second, forming a
#C honey farm. Subsequent gliders form a crystal growing upstream. When
#C the crystal reaches an eater near the gun, it begins to decay.
#C When it's all gone, the cycle begins again.
#C The period of this pattern is 6600, but by moving the PDs, any period
#C of the form 750 + 1950n (n>=0) can be obtained.
#O Dean Hickerson, 3/27/90
x = 96, y = 113, rule = B3/S23
So it's definitely not true that novelties are always
However, it's certainly true that new never-before-seen random combinations of known pieces are likely
to be uninteresting, unless they solve some problem in a better way than any previous pattern -- smaller, faster to recover, lower population, lower period, or basically whatever criterion you want to advertise.
If a pattern is not any kind of improvement over existing technology, then "Known??" is just not a very appropriate question.