ConwayLife.com

ThePlayzr wrote: September 26th, 2025, 6:44 am R{R{R5INT}INT}INT

(this is vastly smaller than the posts that preceded it)

ababa11e wrote: July 27th, 2024, 1:42 pm C: It must be [...] computable [...]

rip my malicious schemes

position -0.9054582787+0.8094831340i in the z ↦ (Re(z)+i|Im(z)|)^2+c fractal:

screencap.png

itself a copy of the z ↦ (|Re(z)|-i Im(z))^2+c fractal:

another_screencap.png

these two fractals contain many copies of each other, as well as the vastly more boring z ↦ (|Re(z)|+ i Im(z))^2+c and a ...

B/S235 has W110 stripe; 32x128 tile
with help from a slightly smaller crossover component (from redstoneboi/shatterbox in the lounge) and a lot of rearrangement, it can be reduced to 17×51!


this does not work properly in practice due to timing constraints; the outputs need to be properly ...

B/S235 has W110 stripe; demo:

x = 168, y = 256, rule = B/S235:T0,256
64bo2bo3b2obo3b2obo22b7obobo3bo3bo2bo$63bo2b3o5bo2bo2b2o21bo21bo$62bo
6b3o2bobo2bobob20o2b14o3bo3b10o$61bo10bo2bo2bo3bo21bo14bobobo12bobo$
60bo10bo5bo7b19o5b2o8bobobo3bo9b2o$59bo12b5o9bo21bo2bo7bobobo2bobo3b3o
bobo ...

Sounds like this CA also supports some spaceships that are merely tremendously slow, without necessarily being obscenely slow:

#C c/17, c/21, c/25, c/29,
#C c/173, c/310, c/553, c/878, c/1291,
#C c/326, c/571, c/898, c/1313, c/1822,
#C c/779, c/1674, c/3051, c/4934, c/7377,
#C c/1408, c/10272, c ...

Hi everyone, I'm back with another ruletable for a highly contrived rule

I was inspired by this post to make a ruletable for some googologically slow spaceships

@RULE snrship

@COLORS
0 0 0 0
1 255 0 0
2 255 255 255
3 170 0 0
4 255 0 170
5 255 85 0
6 85 255 170
7 170 170 170
8 85 85 85
9 0 255 ...

rule with reflectorless rotating oscillators of period $24\cdot 2^{n}+16n-24$ ($n\ge 2$) (i.e. 8*(3*2^n + 2n - 3), I guess.)
x = 42, y = 40, rule = adjustable_rro_2
DRNJRNJRNJRNJRNJ3$3.DNJRNJRNJRNJRNJ3$6.DJRNJRNJRNJRNJ3$9.DRNJRNJRNJRN
J3$12.DNJRNJRNJRNJ3$15.DJRNJRNJRNJ3$18.DRNJRNJRNJ3$21.DNJRNJRNJ3 ...

Unfortunately, I'm not seeing enough evidence here — Discord and the forum are not the same place. And it's not even the ConwayLife Lounge — it's one user's private server, both in the previous incident and this one. [...] The most damning evidence against him is probably the rant Cole himself ...

Right. However, it's still hard to understand several things, in particular why someone who is apparently genuinely enthusiastic about CA and is capable to contribute suddenly apparently decided to do some unreasonable things.


It doesn't matter WHY cole is trying to run a harassment campaign ...

Your most recent post here looks like a clear violation of forum rule 1 to me.
Other people acting in bad ways do not give any excuse for you acting in bad ways.

Which post? The post where I point out that your earlier point is a genetic fallacy?
That is definitely more diplomatically worded ...

A rather ridiculous thing about this I can see from my viewpoint, is that there are several people without any recent CA-related activity on the forums on one side, and someone with a significant amount of recent constructive CA-related activity on the other side.

This is utterly irrelevant and ...

Is there any evidence of them being present among users visible in the screenshots (and not, say, someone else impersonating them)?


Well, for one, it's the account that he was originally using when he got banned from the conwaylife discord for good, and in particular the only account that he ...

I have learned from my mistake and have moved on.


Lying shamelessly to the moderators of *THIS* site to get out of trouble is a new low for you.

You should tell everyone about the conlang you're making that shows you very much haven't moved on from it, given that you use it primarily to, I ...

[lengthy rant]
I was in the ConwayLife Discord for a while and now I'm planning to leave it.


You know, taking this drama here is a good way to get yourself banned here too.


In reality, I am neither [transphobic nor nb-phobic].

cole, you literally asked me, and I quote,
I just want to ...

* many occurrences are in thread names (e.g. "Rules 1 transition from Life") which are automatically copied from the first post, unless the post's author changes the default subject line. In a sense, all these occurrences in thread names "belong" to the first post and could be counted as just one ...

Sorry to bring this up again but

In my experience, both terms are in use, but "transition" seems significantly more commonly used than "condition". Just from a descriptive linguistics standpoint, it makes more sense to use "transition".

This seems actually pretty tricky ngl. I'm not sure that there are a whole lot of barriers that WE have control over (seeing as we're literally a chat forum with very little barriers to entry), a lot of the issues probably just come from disproportional male exposure/access to science education ...

protip: when a mod locks a thread, you probably shouldn't create a nearly identical thread with a couple haphazard added "rules" in a futile attempt to prevent it from going the same direction as the original.

Interesting loop: x = 75, y = 61, rule = B3/S23
35bo$33b3o$32bo$17b2o13b2o$18bo$18bobo$19b2o$25bo$24bobo$23b2ob2o8bo$
24bo2bo9bo$24b2ob2o6b3o$25bobo$26bo$26bo$5b2o18bobo4b2o$6bo20bo4bo$5bo
7bo8b2obo7b3o$5b2o6bo8b3o10bo$2o19bo$o2b4o4b3o8b2o21bobo$bobo2bo3bob2o
3bobo2b2o22b2o$2o2b2o4b2o5bobo6bo19bo ...

Well, GOL is omniperiodic now, thanks to the p41 that glider_rider found. That's one big unproven conjecture, PROVEN.

but that doesn't prove anything because UC(H,Q) can be 0


Wel, no, it can't be, because it's going to be a valid Turing machine, and by your definition that means it's not going to output 0, which only happens if it's not a valid turing machine.


Out of curiosity, exactly where do you think is ...

saying every colored turing machine can be emulated by colorless one is like saying that every English sentence can be written in Basic English so English is no more powerful than Basic English


I'm done
I give up
I literally have no idea how on earth you could possibly use this kind of argument ...

Have you heard of SmoothLife ? It's basically a position-continuous time-continuous rule (you could also argue that states are continuous, I guess, though the line between continuous and non-continuous states in a position-continuous system is pretty fuzzy.

semirelevant side note: I wonder what ...

by the way I didn't find any proof against the existence of a circle-free turing machine that solves the halting problem
all proof rely on the fact the halting decider accept an input

you can emulate accepting input by imagining that the turing machine has extra states necessary to write the ...

you didn't read my last comment. you're proof does not work


please tell me what the error in my proof is, then. As far as I can tell your post just provided an example of the construction I provided in my proof... called on a different turing machine, and, wow! If you don't do the construction ...