Suggested LifeWiki edits

[LaundryPizza03]

The RLE attached to the c/3o ladder in OCA:Life without death does not match any of the ladders in the file. Also, the images should be converted to LifeViewer.

Code: Select all

#N c/3 ladders
#O Dean Hickerson
#C Some uncommon c/3 ladders in Life without death.
#C www.conwaylife.com/wiki/index.php?title=Life_without_death
x = 14, y = 213, rule = b3/s012345678
3bobo8b$b7o6b$b3ob3o6b$9o5b$b8o5b$bob3obo6b$6o8b$bobo10b$b3o10b$2ob3o
8b$bob3o8b$b7o6b$8o6b$b3ob3o6b$b6o7b$3bo10b4$3bobo8b$b7o6b$bob3ob2o5b$
10o4b$b8o5b$b3ob3o6b$8o6b$bobobo8b$b5o8b$3obo9b$b6o7b$b6o7b$2obobo8b$b
6o7b$b6o7b$2obobo8b$b6o7b$b6o7b$3obo9b$b5o8b$b5o8b$3obo9b$b6o7b$b6o7b$
2obobo8b$b6o7b$b6o7b$2obobo8b$b6o7b$b6o7b$3obo9b$b5o8b$b5o8b$3obo9b$b
6o7b$b6o7b$2obobo8b$b6o7b$b6o7b$2obobo8b$b6o7b$b6o7b$3obo9b$b5o8b$b5o
8b$3obo9b$b6o7b$b6o7b$2obobo8b$b6o7b$b6o7b$2obobo8b$b6o7b$b6o7b$3obo9b
$b5o8b$bobobo8b$8o6b$b3ob3o6b$b8o5b$10o4b$bob3ob2o5b$b7o6b$3bobo8b4$3b
o10b$b5o8b$bob3o8b$7o7b$b5o8b$b3o10b$4o10b$bo12b$bo12b$3o11b$b3o10b$bo
b2o9b$6o8b$bob3o8b$b6o7b$3obobo7b$b7o6b$b2ob3o7b$9o5b$b9o4b$bob2o2b2o
5b$3ob3obo5b$b7o6b$b2ob3o7b$5obo7b$b6o7b$b4obo7b$3ob3o7b$b7o6b$b2ob3o
7b$5obo7b$b5o8b$b4o9b$3ob3o7b$b6o7b$b2ob3o7b$5o9b$b5o8b$b4o9b$3ob2o8b$
b5o8b$b2ob2o8b$5o9b$b5o8b$b4o9b$3obo9b$b3o10b$b2obo9b$5o9b$b5o8b$b4o9b
$3obo9b$b3o10b$b2o11b$4o10b$b4o9b$b3o10b$3o11b$b3o10b$b2o11b$4o10b$b3o
10b$bo12b$3o11b$b2obo9b$6o8b$b5o8b$b4o9b$2b3o9b$2bo11b4$b2obobobo5b$b
10o3b$3ob3ob3o3b$b12ob$b13o$5ob3ob3ob$b5ob3ob2ob$b3ob3ob3o2b$12o2b$b2o
b3ob3o3b$b4ob3obo3b$10o4b$b4ob3obo3b$b2ob3ob3o3b$12o2b$b2ob3ob3o3b$bob
2o2b2o2b2ob$13ob$b12ob$b2ob3ob3o3b$11o3b$b2obobobobo3b$b9o4b$2ob3ob3o
4b$b8o5b$bobobobo6b$8o6b$b2obobobo5b$b10o3b$3ob3ob3o3b$b11o2b$b11o2b$
2obo3bo6b$b10o3b$b10o3b$2ob3ob3o4b$b9o4b$bobobobo6b$8o6b$b4obo7b$b5o8b
$3obo9b$b4o9b$b3o10b$2ob2o9b$b4o9b$b2obo9b$5o9b$b3ob2o7b$b6o7b$7o7b$bo
b3o8b$b5o8b$3bo!

The file for the c/3o ladder should be this, or possibly the same pattern advanced by 12 generations, but I do not object to keeping the file for the uncommon c/3o ladders somewhere in the section.

Code: Select all

#C Matches the first frame of File:C3ladder.gif
x = 5, y = 8, rule = B3/S012345678
o$3o$b3o$ob3o$ob2o$b2o$3o$o!

The uncommon-speed ladders match the first pattern in their respective attached RLEs.

[Book]

1. Should 58P8H4V0 be in category "Semi-natural periodic objects"?

2. 29P3H1V0 is in wiki category "Natural periodic objects" but I cannot find anything that supports that it is natural. If it is, the claim should be supported in the article. If not, it should be removed from the category.

3. 30P3H1V0 is in wiki category "Natural periodic objects" but I cannot find anything that supports that it is natural. If it is, the claim should be supported in the article. If not, it should be removed from the category.

4. The articles for Crab, Edge repair spaceship, 25P3H1V0.2 and 25P3H1V0.2 claim they appeared from soup but I cannot find anything that supports that claim. If the claim is correct, the reference for it should be cited and they should be so categorized.

Thanks for any information to help clean these up.

[hotdogPi]

4. The articles for Crab, Edge repair spaceship, 25P3H1V0.2 and 25P3H1V0.2 claim they appeared from soup but I cannot find anything that supports that claim. If the claim is correct, the reference for it should be cited and they should be so categorized.

Yet to appear from soup.

The other three have been fixed.

[Book]

4. The articles for Crab, Edge repair spaceship, 25P3H1V0.2 and 25P3H1V0.2 claim they appeared from soup but I cannot find anything that supports that claim. If the claim is correct, the reference for it should be cited and they should be so categorized.

Yet to appear from soup.

The other three have been fixed.

Thanks..

[hotdogPi]

This is directed at Book.

Page: Most common objects on Catagolue

"These 100 objects comprise 99.96% of the occurrences of the more than 300,000 objects in the census."

This means that 1 in 2500 objects are off the list, i.e. there should be two objects off the list for every mango. This is absolutely not my experience. What should it be?

[yujh]

I’m just thinking about why cumulative has to be there.

[Book]

I’m just thinking about why cumulative has to be there.

cumulative is there to show how much the first several objects dominate, how quickly they reach 99%+ of all object occurrences

the top 100 totaled 1.82378E+15 out of 1.82459E+15 total object occurrences

here's the raw data (sorry for the lack of column alignment)

Object Rank Occurrences Cumulative Cumulative %
xs4_33 (Block) 1 5.63349E+14 5.63349E+14 30.9%
xp2_7 (Blinker) 2 5.23114E+14 1.08646E+15 59.5%
xs6_696 (Beehive) 3 2.98533E+14 1.385E+15 75.9%
xq4_153 (Glider) 4 1.60334E+14 1.54533E+15 84.7%
xs7_2596 (Loaf) 5 8.8075E+13 1.6334E+15 89.5%
xs5_253 (Boat) 6 8.12693E+13 1.71467E+15 94.0%
xs6_356 (Ship) 7 5.61046E+13 1.77078E+15 97.1%
xs4_252 (Tub) 8 1.77314E+13 1.78851E+15 98.0%
xs8_6996 (Pond) 9 1.72461E+13 1.80576E+15 99.0%
xs7_25ac (Long boat) 10 5.71144E+12 1.81147E+15 99.3%
xp2_7e (Toad) 11 3.99113E+12 1.81546E+15 99.5%
xs12_g8o653z11 (Ship-tie) 12 2.89755E+12 1.81836E+15 99.7%
xp2_318c (Beacon) 13 1.2481E+12 1.8196E+15 99.7%
xs6_25a4 (Barge) 14 1.19965E+12 1.8208E+15 99.8%
xs14_g88m952z121 (Half-bakery) 15 9.81299E+11 1.82178E+15 99.8%
xs8_69ic (Mango) 16 4.41905E+11 1.82223E+15 99.9%
xs7_178c (Eater 1) 17 2.84646E+11 1.82251E+15 99.9%
xq4_6frc (Lightweight spaceship) 18 2.34218E+11 1.82275E+15 99.9%
xs8_25ak8 (Long barge) 19 1.60357E+11 1.82291E+15 99.9%

[Book]

4. The articles for Crab, Edge repair spaceship, 25P3H1V0.2 and 25P3H1V0.2 claim they appeared from soup but I cannot find anything that supports that claim. If the claim is correct, the reference for it should be cited and they should be so categorized.

Yet to appear from soup.

The other three have been fixed.

Thanks..

"yet" as in "not yet"?

[hotdogPi]

I'm saying it should be more than 99.96%. 99.96% is 2499 in 2500, i.e. one in 2500 objects aren't in the top 100. It's nowhere near 1 in 2500.

[Book]

I'm saying it should be more than 99.96%. 99.96% is 2499 in 2500, i.e. one in 2500 objects aren't in the top 100. It's nowhere near 1 in 2500.

Oh, I misunderstood you. I just imported the download file from Catagolue into Excel. The spreadsheet looks fine so I think the math is correct.

I have no sense of 1/2500 being out of line or not. But I'll do another data dump soon and see if I get a different result. The one possibility is not having the right grand total, since Catagolue keeps updating it's results in pretty much real time. That is, you gotta be quick to get the download file from the top 100 and capture the grand total at the same "instant."

[Book]

I'm saying it should be more than 99.96%. 99.96% is 2499 in 2500, i.e. one in 2500 objects aren't in the top 100. It's nowhere near 1 in 2500.

Oh, I misunderstood you. I just imported the download file from Catagolue into Excel. The spreadsheet looks fine so I think the math is correct.

I have no sense of 1/2500 being out of line or not. But I'll do another data dump soon and see if I get a different result. The one possibility is not having the right grand total, since Catagolue keeps updating it's results in pretty much real time. That is, you gotta be quick to get the download file from the top 100 and capture the grand total at the same "instant." I don't think a few seconds would change the top 100, their ranks, relative freq or FC. Might not even change the cum % of the top several objects. But could impact that 99.96%. We'll see.

[dvgrn]

I'm saying it should be more than 99.96%. 99.96% is 2499 in 2500, i.e. one in 2500 objects aren't in the top 100. It's nowhere near 1 in 2500.

Looks to me like a couple of nines got taken out of that statistic. Very close to 99.9996% of all objects are in the top 100. Using the current textcensus for C1, I'm getting a cumulative percentage value of 0.99999458934011 as of the 100th-most-common object.

It's not clear to me if there's maybe a better way to handle the yl objects, though, and BLSEs and GPSEs are common enough that they could shift that sixth digit by a little more than 0.000001 -- so that's probably why I didn't come up with 99.9996%.

[Book]

I'm saying it should be more than 99.96%. 99.96% is 2499 in 2500, i.e. one in 2500 objects aren't in the top 100. It's nowhere near 1 in 2500.

Looks to me like a couple of nines got taken out of that statistic. Very close to 99.9996% of all objects are in the top 100. Using the current textcensus for C1, I'm getting a cumulative percentage value of 0.99999458934011 as of the 100th-most-common object.

It's not clear to me if there's maybe a better way to handle the yl objects, though, and BLSEs and GPSEs are common enough that they could shift that sixth digit by a little more than 0.000001 -- so that's probably why I didn't come up with 99.9996%.

I grabbed that census too. I'll fool around with it and get more definitive values for the wiki.

Thanks for you three chiming in on this.

[dvgrn]

Just as a general FYI: I'm almost done now with a series of recent runs of the auto-upload script. In an hour or so, if a wiki article says there's a .cells file or an .rle file somewhere, it will actually be there, and hopefully it will contain the right pattern.

There's one problem remaining (that I've found so far -- but please report any additional stuff that doesn't look right!) A couple of people recently have gotten into the habit of putting headerless RLE into the RLE namespace. This works fine in LifeWiki and LifeViewer, and in Golly most of the time, but it's not consistent with the rest of the LifeWiki pattern collection.

So I've added RLE headers to all the RLE:{pname} articles that were missing them. But as of right now there are still a few dozen RLE files that were auto-uploaded before the RLE namespace patterns got fixed, like 14911m.rle. With luck I should be able to get those all fixed sometime tomorrow. Further bulletins as events warrant.

[Book]

I'm saying it should be more than 99.96%. 99.96% is 2499 in 2500, i.e. one in 2500 objects aren't in the top 100. It's nowhere near 1 in 2500.

Looks to me like a couple of nines got taken out of that statistic. Very close to 99.9996% of all objects are in the top 100. Using the current textcensus for C1, I'm getting a cumulative percentage value of 0.99999458934011 as of the 100th-most-common object.

It's not clear to me if there's maybe a better way to handle the yl objects, though, and BLSEs and GPSEs are common enough that they could shift that sixth digit by a little more than 0.000001 -- so that's probably why I didn't come up with 99.9996%.

I grabbed that census too. I'll fool around with it and get more definitive values for the wiki.

Thanks for you three chiming in on this.

By the time my download of the census took place, it was .999994578. I think 99.99946 is as close as we can get to accuracy for a dynamic census.

This all came about because I wanted to avoid a spreadsheet with over 300,000 rows. That was fine for all the calculations on that page except cum % to enough significant digits to pass the Mango test. Seriously, hotdogPI's sense of the data was spot-on.

Wiki page has been updated. My hope is that the cum % numbers shown will hold up over time. I'm pretty sure they're the only items in the table likely to change, so this page should be easily audited and maintained.

[Book]

Would like to merge 3c/14 pi wave into 3c/10 pi wave as a section of that page. Then change the disambig to a redirect.

[hotdogPi]

Would like to merge 3c/14 pi wave into 3c/10 pi wave as a section of that page. Then change the disambig to a redirect.

No. They are completely different things.

[yujh]

Would like to merge 3c/14 pi wave into 3c/10 pi wave as a section of that page. Then change the disambig to a redirect.

No. They are completely different things.

i completely agree.

[LaundryPizza03]

At, Isotropic non-totalistic Life-like cellular automaton, the section "Von Neumann extensions" should be a subsubsection of "Range-2 von Neumann neighbourhood" because it presents a notation for that rulespace and references the Hensel notation table.

[GUYTU6J]

Two proposals: 1)merge Sawtooth 201 and Sawtooth 181 with Sawtooth 177, 2)merge as mentioned on Talk:Electric fence.

Meanwhile, reiterating one of my unanswered concerns:

it is now quick and easy to add static images using RLE2PNG http://localhost/philbookmandotcom/tools/rle2png.htm.

What are the parameters for creating static pattern images with your method? Per Help:Images, the LifeWiki convention is to have 15×15 pixels for a single cell and 1 pixel for a borderline in color (192, 192, 192) (#C0C0C0).

[Book]

What are the parameters for creating static pattern images with your method? Per Help:Images, the LifeWiki convention is to have 15×15 pixels for a single cell and 1 pixel for a borderline in color (192, 192, 192) (#C0C0C0).

1. I had used a darker gridline, 808080. Changed it to c0c0c0
2. Because I allow a variety of scaled image size choices, cell size depends on pattern size and scale chosen

[LaundryPizza03]

The RLE in the LifeViewer and the copyable file for Crystallization and decay oscillator should be set to the minimal phase, like most other oscillators. This is generation 2522 of the currently represented phase.

Code: Select all

x = 78, y = 91, rule = B3/S23
5b2o$5b2o3$4b3o$4b3o2$24b2o$24bo2bo$2b2o3b2o7b5o7bo9bobo$3b5o7bo5bo6bo
7bo3bo$4b3o8bo3b2o7bo7bo$5bo10bo7bo2bo7bo4bo8b2o$24b2o10bo12b2o$36bo3b
o$27bobo8bobo$27b2o$28bo2$6bo$7b2o$6b2o5$2o3b2o$2b3o8bobo$bo3bo8b2o$2b
obo9bo$3bo2$35bo$33b3o$3b2o27bo$3b2o27b2o7$20b2o$20bo$21b3o$23bo25$66b
2o6b2o$64bo4bo2bo4bo$64bo4bo2bo4bo$64bo4bo2bo4bo$66b2o6b2o7$60bo$59bob
o$58bo3bo$58bo3bo$58bo3bo$58bo3bo$58bo3bo$58bo3bo$59bobo$60bo!

[Ian07]

The RLE in the LifeViewer and the copyable file for Crystallization and decay oscillator should be set to the minimal phase, like most other oscillators.

Done.

[GUYTU6J]

Request for original records for "light speed oscillator"s, now merged in a new article, that were discovered by Josh Ball in August 2007. Game of Life News mentioned a period-6 version but not the period-5 variants.

[dvgrn]

Request for original records for "light speed oscillator"s, now merged in a new article, that were discovered by Josh Ball in August 2007. Game of Life News mentioned a period-6 version but not the period-5 variants.

There really isn't much -- a message forwarded to the old LifeCA email list by Heinrich Koenig:

Received an email from Josh Ball with some p5 lightspeed signal variations " using WinLifeSearch v0.61 " that appear to be new/unknown and of interest:

Code: Select all

#C P5 lightspeed oscillators
#C by Josh Ball
x = 172, y = 73, rule = B3/S23
160bo$158b3o$155bobo3b2o$153b3ob4o2bob2o$152bo7bob2obo$151bob5obo2bo2bo2b
o$113b2o36b2o3bob2o2bobob3o$113b2o34b2o3bo8bobo$148bobob2obo8bo2b2o$113b4o3b
2o26bo2bobobo5bo3b3obo$113bo3bo2bo28bobo2b2o4bobo6bo$29b2o19bo2bo62bobobo29b
o2b2o6bo5b2ob2o$29bobo18b4o62b3obobo22b2o6b3o9b2obobo$31bo3bo2bo2bo2bo2bo6b
2o15b2o45bob2obo21bobo5b2o10bo2bobo$30b2ob21o2bob2obo2bo2bo3bo33b2ob2o7bo5b
o23bo2b2o14bob2o$25b2o2bo2bo22bo3bob4o2b3obo33b2obo7b2ob5ob2o17bo2b5o13b2o$21b
2obobo2b2o2b4o2b3o2b3o2b3ob2ob2o7b2o3bob2o34bo16b2o17b3o4bo7bob3o2bob2o$8b
2o2b2o3b2o3bobo6b2o5b2o3b2o3b2o4bobob4obo3b2obobo2bo32bob2o2bo4bob3o5bo2b
o2bo2bo2bo5bo2bo7b4o2bobobo$8bo3bobo2bo3bo3bo3b2o2bob2o2b3o2b3o2b3obo7bo4b
3o3bob2o33bobob2o3bo5b23obo9b3ob2o2bobo$9b3o2bo3bo2b2ob2o2bo2bobo19b3o2b3o2b
o2bo5bo37b3o4bo6bo25bo12bobobo$11bobob4o5bo4b5ob2o2b3o2b3o2b3obo7bo4b3o3b
ob2o38bobo4bo3bo2b3o2b3o2b3o2b5o2b2o3b3o3b2o2b2o$13bobo3b5o3bobo8b2o3b2o3b
2o4bobob4obo3b2obobo2bo32b5obo6bo3b2o3b2o3b2o3b2o4bo4b2obob2o2bo2b2o$10bo2b
o3b2o4bobobo2bob5o2b3o2b3o2b3ob2ob2o7b2o3bob2o34bo3bobobo2b2o2b3o2b3o2b3o2b
3o2b5o8bo4bo2bo$11bobobo3bob4ob2obobo23bo3bob4o2b3obo39bo2bobo6bo29bo2bo5b
2o$9bo3bobo3bob2o6bob23o2bob2obo2bo2bo3bo40b3obo4b2ob23o2bobo2bob3o$10bob
o3bo6b6obo4bo2bo2bo2bo2bo6b2o15b2o44b2o2bobo2bo2bo2bo2bo2bo2bo2bo2bob3obob
o3bo$8bobobob2o2b5o5bobobo17b4o60b2obob3obo23bobobobobo2b2o$7bobo3bo2b2o4b
ob2o2bo2b2o17bo2bo60b2obo2bo2b2o21b2obobobob2o$8bo5bobo2bo3b2obobo88bo5bo23b
obobobo$15bo2b2o7bo89bobobobo23bo5bo$116b2obobob2o21b2o2bo2b2o$117bob3obo23b
ob3obo$117bo2bo2bo23bobobobo$116b2o5b2o21b2obobob2o$117bobobobo23bo5bo$117b
obobobo23bo2bo2bo$116b2ob3ob2o21b2ob3ob2o$58b2o2b2o53bo2bo2bo23bobobobo$58b
obo2b3o51bo5bo23bobobobo$52bob2o4b2o4bo8b2o39b2obobob2o21b2o5b2o$25b2o2b2ob
2o15bo2b2obo3bo2b2o2bo7bo2bo39bobobobo23bo2bo2bo$24bo2bo2bobo16b3o4b2o2bo3b
ob2o5bo2b2o39bob3obo23bob3obo$23bob2o3bo3bo2bo2bo2bo2bo6b2obob2ob2obobo5b
ob2o2b2o36b2o2bo2b2o21b2obobob2o$24bo2b3ob22obo4bobob2o2bo4bo3bo3bo36bo5b
o23bobobobo$22bobobo2bobo23bo3bo2b2obo3b2obo3b3o2bo35bobobobo23bo5bo$22b2o2b
obo4b2o2b3o2b3o2b3o2b3o3b2o2bo6b2o5b2obobo2bo29b2obobobob2o21b2o2bo2bob2o$26b
obo2bob3o3b2o3b2o3b2o7b2o2b2o13b3o2b3o26b2o2bobobobobo23bob3obob2o$4bo17b
4o4bo3bo2b3o2b3o2b3o3bo3bo5bo13bo2b2o29bo3bobob3obo2bo2bo2bo2bo2bo2bo2bo2b
obo2b2o$3bobo16bo3b5o22bo3b2o18b3o2bo29b3obo2bobo2b23ob2o4bob3o$2bobo20bo2b
o2bob19obo2bo2bo20bobo24b2o5bo2bo29bo6bobo2bo$2bo2b3o18b2o3bo22b5o3bo16bob
o24bo2bo4bo8b5o2b3o2b3o2b3o2b3o2b2o2bobobo3bo$3b2o2bo13bo5bo3bo3b3o2b3o2b
3o2bo3bo4b4o17bo25b2o2bo2b2obob2o4bo4b2o3b2o3b2o3b2o3bo6bob5o$3o2b3o13b2o2b
2o7b2o3b2o3b2o3b3obo2bobo45b2o2b2o3b3o3b2o2b5o2b3o2b3o2b3o2bo3bo4bobo$o2b
obob2o5b2o6bo2b2o3b3o2b3o2b3o2b3o2b2o4bobo2b2o40bobobo12bo25bo6bo4b3o$3bo2b
3o3bob2o3bob2o2bo3bo23bobo2bobobo39bobo2b2ob3o9bob23o5bo3b2obobo$4bo3bo3b
o4bo2b2obobo4bob22ob3o2bo41bobobo2b4o7bo2bo5bo2bo2bo2bo2bo5b3obo4bo2b2obo$5b
2o2b2obo5bobob2ob2obob2o6bo2bo2bo2bo2bo3bo3b2obo39b2obo2b3obo7bo4b3o17b2o16b
o$7b2o2bo5b2obo3bo2b2o4b3o16bobo2bo2bo43b2o13b5o2bo17b2ob5ob2o7bob2o$7bo2b
o7bo2b2o2bo3bob2o2bo15b2ob2o2b2o41b2obo14b2o2bo23bo5bo7b2ob2o$8b2o8bo4b2o4b
2obo67bobo2bo10b2o5bobo21bob2obo$19b3o2bobo73bobob2o9b3o6b2o22bobob3o$21b
2o2b2o72b2ob2o5bo6b2o2bo29bobobo$101bo6bobo4b2o2bobo28bo2bo3bo$101bob3o3b
o5bobobo2bo26b2o3b4o$102b2o2bo8bob2obobo$105bobo8bo3b2o34b2o$102b3obobo2b
2obo3b2o36b2o$102bo2bo2bo2bob5obo$105bob2obo7bo$104b2obo2b4ob3o$108b2o3bob
o$110b3o$110bo!

The only other mention of "lightspeed oscillators" that comes up offhand is a much older discussion between Noam Elkies and Dean Hickerson. Here's a Cliff Notes version:

Subject: lifesrc and ye shall find, cont'd


p5 source and sink for the simplest lightspeed wire:

Code: Select all

..........................................oo....o
..........................................o.....ooo
............oo.............................o.......o.....oo
........oo...o....o..o..o..o..o..o.oo...ooo.o...oo..o.....o
........o..o......ooooooooooooooooo.o..o..o.o..o..oo.o.ooo
oo.......o.oo.......................o.o.o...o.o..o...o.o
o..oo...oo.o....oooooooooooooooooooo.o.o....o.oo.ooo.o
.ooo.....o...o.o..o...o.....o...o....o.....o.o...o...o....oo
....o..o.o...o.o...o....o....o....o.o.o...oooo..o...o...o..o
.ooo.oo..o.o.....o.....o...o.....o.....o..o...o......o..oo
.o..o.o....o.ooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.o.o....ooooo.o.o
..o.o.o.ooo.o..........................o.o.ooooo.....oo..o
...o..oo....o..oooooooooooooooooooooooo...o....o..oo...oo
....oo...ooo...o..o..o..o..o..o..o..o......ooo....o.ooo
......oo.o...................................oo.......o
......o.o.

(Perhaps this has already been sourced and sunk and I didn't notice?)
The source seems excessively large but it's hard enough to stop lifesrc
from extending the wire indefinitely.

Subject: Re: stabilized c-wires


Mostly to Noam Elkies

me> I'm pretty sure it's new. I believe the only previously known
> lightspeed oscillators are the 2 p5s in the stamp collection.

Noam> I don't see it there; the closest I can find is Bill Gosper's
> report on your discovery c.1992 of a p5 wire terminated on one
> end by a stable sink and on the other by a c/4 puffer of which
> the wire+sink is the exhaust. Is there a stable p5 source too?

Do you have the final version of the stamp collection, completed about
8/17/95? If so, the 2 patterns are 5.6.0 and 5.7.0. If not, let me
know and I'll send it.

For your convenience, here they are:

Code: Select all

x = 74, y = 34, rule = B3/S23
10bo$9bobo36b2o$2bo4b3obo5bo31bo3bo2bo6bo8b2o$bobo2bo4b2o3bobo30bob3o
2b3o3bobo6bobo$bobo2bob2o7bo32bo3b2o3bobo2bo6bo$2ob2obobob2obo4b3o30b
2o3bob2obob2ob2o2b2o$bo4bobobo2b2obob2o5b2o3b2o3b2o3b2o3b2o6bob2o4bo4b
o2bo$bobobo5bobob2ob2obob2o3b2o3b2o3b2o3b2o3b2o5bobob2obobo2bob3o$2bo
2b2obobob2ob2o6b2o3b2o3b2o3b2o3b2o3b2ob4o2bobob2ob2o6bo$3b2o3bobo2bo5b
2o4b2o3b2o3b2o3b2o3b2o3bo3b2o8b2o5b2o$5b2obob2obob2o2bo34bo$5bob2obo2b
ob2o4bo29b2obobo$11b2o7b2o30bo2b2o$50bobo$50b2o4$6b2o18b2o8b2o$7bo18bo
2bo6b2o$4b3o20b3o10bo$4bo4bo2bo2bo2bo2bo2bo9b7o$2bobob26o2bo$bobobo26b
obob2o2b3o$bobobobo2b3o2b3o2b3o2b3o3b2obo3bobo2bob2o$2obo5b2o3b2o3b2o
3b2o3b2obo4b2o2bobobo$bobobobo2b3o2b3o2b3o2b3o2b2ob3obo2bo2bo2bo$bobob
o27bo3bo2b3o2b2o$2bobob25obob3o$4bo4bo2bo2bo2bo2bo2bo2bo2bobobo4bob2o$
4b3o24bobo2b4obo$7bo25bob2o5bo$6b2o25bo5b3o$32b2o5bo!

me> I once found a sink for a p6 wire, but couldn't finish the source.
> Maybe you can do it; here's my best effort:

Noam> Again I doubt that I can find a p6 object which you have
> specifically searched for with your own program.

I don't think that my searches were systematic or complete enough to
justify such pessimism. As you mentioned, it's hard to stop lifesrc
from just extending the wire indefinitely, so once I found a way to do
that, I explored that particular continuation; there are probably others
that I never examined.

> I do note, though, that the stator of the sink is much wider than needed,

I'm not surprised. I tend not to worry about shrinking stators until I
have a complete working oscillator, which I never did in that one.

Dean Hickerson