OCA talk:Stains

Existence of nfinite growth patterns vs. expanding forever

The article currently says:

"Most close variations of these rules expand forever, but this one curiously does not. Why?" - It was an open question till 1999. The first contradictory patterns were published then, all with 2c/5 velocities and linear growth. In 2016, speed 3c/7 linear growth patterns were discovered. Nonlinear infinite growth problem is still open in this rule.

I well may be wrong, but I think this misunderstands the question posed on Mirek's page. "Expand forever", as I understand it, does not mean that a rule has infinite growth patterns, it means that the rule has explosive character: that random soups tend to grow without bounds (for some value of "tend to").

Try removing the B6 condition, for instance: B378/S235678, for instance, is explosive. Why isn't Stains? Apple Bottom (talk) 15:24, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

A naive, ambiguous definition was the problem: "Expand forever". Enough large soups' border will contain such wickstrechers with enough high probability. However, what is not (dis)proven yet: the heads of the discovered patterns are (not) protected from accidental parasite fast signals (with signal velocities higher than 2c/5 or 3c/7). Naszvadi (talk) 21:24, 15 January 2017 (UTC)