Soup search results

[testitemqlstudop]

yep, it formed a contiguous range up to 47k

[praosylen]

Natural unix on clock in C1, found by Adam P. Goucher:

Code: Select all

x = 16, y = 16, rule = B3/S23
bbobobobooobbobb$
booboobboobooooo$
obbboobboobboobb$
oooboobobbbbobbo$
bbbbooboobooobbb$
ooobbboobboboobo$
bboobobbbooooobo$
obobbboooobooboo$
obboobbobboboooo$
ooooooobbobbobbo$
bboobbooboobbbbo$
obbbbbbobbbbobbb$
bboobooooooobooo$
obobboobbobooboo$
oobbobooooobbbbb$
bobbboooobbbooob!

Interestingly, it forms almost the exact same way as the known synthesis forms it.

[nnwid]

something different

Code: Select all

x = 69, y = 68, rule = B3/S23
14$57bo2bo$57bo3bo$55bo4bo$54bo2b3o$54b3o$52b2o$51bobo$51b2o$49b2o$48b
obo$48b2o$46b2o$45bobo$45b2o$43b2o$42bobo$42b2o$40b2o$39bobo$39b2o$37b
2o$36bobo$36b2o$34b2o$33bobo$33b2o$31b2o$30bobo$30b2o$28b2o$27bobo$27b
2o$25b2o$24bobo$24b2o$22b2o$21bobo$23bo$19b2obo$22bo$22bo$19bobo$20bo!

Natural unix on clock in C1, found by Adam P. Goucher:

Code: Select all

x = 16, y = 16, rule = B3/S23
bbobobobooobbobb$
booboobboobooooo$
obbboobboobboobb$
oooboobobbbbobbo$
bbbbooboobooobbb$
ooobbboobboboobo$
bboobobbbooooobo$
obobbboooobooboo$
obboobbobboboooo$
ooooooobbobbobbo$
bboobbooboobbbbo$
obbbbbbobbbbobbb$
bboobooooooobooo$
obobboobbobooboo$
oobbobooooobbbbb$
bobbboooobbbooob!

Interestingly, it forms almost the exact same way as the known synthesis forms it.

[John Goodman]

15-bit still life update: After a nice cluster of four new xs15s in the last ten days, there are now fifteen remaining to appear in C1.

[John Goodman]

We are getting an immense number of illegitimate hauls to C1 today from 'Anonymous' -- 150,000,000-soup hauls (with only about 2.2 million objects each) are coming in every 16 to 18 seconds. An attack of some sort?

[Lewis]

We've got a second loafer soup, in G1 this time. Not sure if it's old/uninteresting news, I've only just noticed it now.

Code: Select all

x = 16, y = 16, rule = B3/S23
obooboobbboboobb$
boboobbboobboobo$
bbobboobbboooobb$
bobooobboobobboo$
bboboobbooboboob$
obbobobobobobbob$
oobobbbbbbbboboo$
bbbbobobbboooobo$
oooobbbbbooobbbo$
ooooboboobboboob$
boobboobbbbbbobo$
obbbooooooobbobo$
booboobbbobbbobb$
bbbbbboobbbbbbob$
bbobboboboobbbbo$
obbobooboooobooo!

[Saka]

Amazing! And of course it was found by none other than Rob Liston. The loafer appears a bit later than in the first soup.

Will Rob Liston get the "Loafer" badge like John Goodman, or not? Since this was submitted in G1

[Ian07]

Not sure if it's old/uninteresting news, I've only just noticed it now.

Attribute function says it was found yesterday:

Code: Select all

*** xq7_3nw17862z6952 ***
Soup k_7GHmhF2BNuxN28242308 was found on 2020-04-01 at 08:50:46 UTC and is owned by John Goodman
Soup k_fJGreMjvjkiw903275149 was found on 2020-06-02 at 21:56:54 UTC and is owned by rliston@gmail.com

[apg]

Amazing! And of course it was found by none other than Rob Liston. The loafer appears a bit later than in the first soup.

Will Rob Liston get the "Loafer" badge like John Goodman, or not? Since this was submitted in G1

Yes, b3s23/C1 and b3s23/G1 are both valid censuses for producing user 'discoveries' (and, by extension, badges).

[praosylen]

The first yl96 in asymmetry has appeared, found of course by Rob Liston:

Code: Select all

x = 16, y = 16, rule = B3/S23
boobbbooobooobbb$
oboobooboobooboo$
booobobbobbbbobb$
oobbboobbboobbbb$
obooooobobooooob$
bbobbboooobobobb$
bbboobbobobbbbob$
boobbobobobooobo$
bobboobobobobooo$
obbbobobobboboob$
bobbbboobooboobo$
obbobooobboobbbo$
bbbobboboobbobbb$
boobooobobobobob$
bobbobobbbbboobo$
oobbooobbboobobb!

[Entity Valkyrie 2]

If switch engines are quite common, what's the chance of a 2-engine Cordership spontaneously appearing in soup?

[Freywa]

If switch engines are quite common, what's the chance of a 2-engine Cordership spontaneously appearing in soup?

Zero. It's ridiculous (a 2EC is larger than the 16-by-16 square seed).

[Hunting]

If switch engines are quite common, what's the chance of a 2-engine Cordership spontaneously appearing in soup?

Zero. It's ridiculous (a 2EC is larger than the 16-by-16 square seed).

False claim. A twin bee shuttle is also much larger than 16x16 and for that matter, there's several 2-engine Corderpuffer occuring naturally.

[Freywa]

False claim. A twin bee shuttle is also much larger than 16x16 and for that matter, there's several 2-engine Corderpuffer occuring naturally.

When I said "zero" I meant "zero in the sense of statistical mechanics".

The Corderships rely on laying down and deleting blocks on their edges to move. There is also a bunch of junk at the backend that needs to self-cancel in order to leave no debris. The chance of both these things popping out of random ash is about the same as the chance an idealised monkey will type the witches' first speech in Macbeth.

[Hunting]

False claim. A twin bee shuttle is also much larger than 16x16 and for that matter, there's several 2-engine Corderpuffer occuring naturally.

When I said "zero" I meant "zero in the sense of statistical mechanics".

The Corderships rely on laying down and deleting blocks on their edges to move. There is also a bunch of junk at the backend that needs to self-cancel in order to leave no debris. The chance of both these things popping out of random ash is about the same as the chance an idealised monkey will type the witches' first speech in Macbeth.

Disagree. Despite having a nice mechanism, 2EC only needs 2 switch engines and nothing else.

More or less, though, this is hand-waving. We'll never know until one pops out.

[Freywa]

Disagree. Despite having a nice mechanism, 2EC only needs 2 switch engines and nothing else.

More or less, though, this is hand-waving. We'll never know until one pops out.

You did not need to say that. Waiting for any object to come out of apgsearch soups is like waiting for atoms of superheavy elements to be produced in a collider – the individual occurrences are random, but even if no instances have appeared we can at least estimate how often they might appear. Of course, the very small probabilities complicate the analysis, but it's not hand-waving.

You are blindly arguing with me for the sake of arguing. You have probably not considered the solid statistics we have compiled over the years running apgsearch on machines of all stripes.

Now, everyone wants to be famous from making discoveries, but they should back away from that aim… we are standing on the shoulders of giants.

[Hunting]

Disagree. Despite having a nice mechanism, 2EC only needs 2 switch engines and nothing else.

More or less, though, this is hand-waving. We'll never know until one pops out.

You did not need to say that. Waiting for any object to come out of apgsearch soups is like waiting for atoms of superheavy elements to be produced in a collider – the individual occurrences are random, but even if no instances have appeared we can at least estimate how often they might appear. Of course, the very small probabilities complicate the analysis, but it's not hand-waving.

You are blindly arguing with me for the sake of arguing. You have probably not considered the solid statistics we have compiled over the years running apgsearch on machines of all stripes.

Now, everyone wants to be famous from making discoveries, but they should back away from that aim… we are standing on the shoulders of giants.

AGF please. There's just thousands of arrangement of two SEs.

You are on a paradox. 999999999 soups is much larger than 1 soup, but the 999999999 soups does not contain a loafer does not mean the 1 soup can't.

[Freywa]

AGF please. There's just thousands of arrangement of two SEs.

I think you've just lost and will not argue the matter with you further.

[dvgrn]

AGF please. There's just thousands of arrangement of two SEs.

I think you've just lost and will not argue the matter with you further.

Hunting's points are perfectly valid, and therefore Hunting is not the one who lost this argument. We do get pairs of switch engines out of soups all the time, and there's no reason why two of them might not show up with the specific offset required for a 2-engine Cordership. The odds are low, but very far from zero. Once the switch engines are in position, all that's required is a little bit more luck in the positioning of junk behind them, and the Cordership will be on its way.

It's not even terribly unlikely that a 16x16 soup could be engineered that produces a 2-engine Cordership. If that can be done, then I guess we could set a definite non-zero lower bound on the probability of appearance -- something like one chance in 2^253 to account for eight orientations of the soup.

Really the lower bound would be much higher than that, because if one soup exists then there are probably gajillions of variants of it. Here's a 20x18 sample that can probably be packed into 16x16 with some effort:

Code: Select all

x = 20, y = 18, rule = B3/S23
8bo$8b4o$8bo3bo2$10b3o7$15b2o$bo13b2o$obo5bo$6b2ob2o$3o2bo3b2o7b2o$6b
2ob2o7b2o$6b4o!

[Freywa]

Hunting's points are perfectly valid, and therefore Hunting is not the one who lost this argument.

Yes, Hunting lost upon saying "AGF". I did not say at any time that the probability was exactly zero. Rather, I said that it could appear, and it could definitely appear like Rich's p16, but the chances are less than those required for an exotic switch engine puffer pair to appear.

[dvgrn]

Hunting's points are perfectly valid, and therefore Hunting is not the one who lost this argument.

Yes, Hunting lost upon saying "AGF". I did not say at any time that the probability was exactly zero. Rather, I said that it could appear, and it could definitely appear like Rich's p16, but the chances are less than those required for an exotic switch engine puffer pair to appear.

If your original response --

If switch engines are quite common, what's the chance of a 2-engine Cordership spontaneously appearing in soup?

Zero. It's ridiculous (a 2EC is larger than the 16-by-16 square seed).

-- is meant to imply that the probability was not exactly zero, then you should probably get in the habit of being much more careful with your wording.

Your reply to EV2's question was, at best, useless and misleading. It's possible that the math will work out such that we shouldn't be terribly surprised if a 2-engine Cordership shows up in a C1 soup tomorrow -- whereas we should definitely be surprised if an SHA-256 monkey produces more than a small fraction of the beginning of Macbeth.

[Freywa]

If your original response is meant to imply that the probability was not exactly zero, then you should probably get in the habit of being much more careful with your wording.

There is some irony weaved into that original post. Clearly the probability is not zero – but from a reasonable Lifenthusiast's viewpoint, the probability of a 2EC occurring would at most be very small. It could happen tomorrow, or a month later. This is the nature of randomness – anything that can appear will appear, given enough computational resources.

Your reply to EV2's question was, at best, useless and misleading. It's possible that the math will work out such that we shouldn't be terribly surprised if a 2-engine Cordership shows up in a C1 soup tomorrow -- whereas we should definitely be surprised if an SHA-256 monkey produces more than a small fraction of the beginning of Macbeth.

I do not think anyone was surprised when Rich's p16 or the pufferfish showed up – or phoenix 1 or the Coe ship or the loafer.

In short, I'm just asking you to curb your excitement when dealing with apgsearch. I've seen the newer members of this forum rushing ahead of themselves a lot.

[apg]

Really the lower bound would be much higher than that, because if one soup exists then there are probably gajillions of variants of it. Here's a 20x18 sample that can probably be packed into 16x16 with some effort:

Code: Select all

x = 20, y = 18, rule = B3/S23
8bo$8b4o$8bo3bo2$10b3o7$15b2o$bo13b2o$obo5bo$6b2ob2o$3o2bo3b2o7b2o$6b
2ob2o7b2o$6b4o!

19x17 parent:

Code: Select all

x = 19, y = 17, rule = B3/S23
7b3o$10b3o$10b3o$11bo7$15b2o$15b2o$3o6bo$b2o3b2obo8bo$2o5bobo8bo$5b3ob
o6bobo$8b2o6bobo!

[Hunting]

Hunting's points are perfectly valid, and therefore Hunting is not the one who lost this argument.

Yes, Hunting lost upon saying "AGF". I did not say at any time that the probability was exactly zero. Rather, I said that it could appear, and it could definitely appear like Rich's p16, but the chances are less than those required for an exotic switch engine puffer pair to appear.

Well, but you did say

You are blindly arguing with me for the sake of arguing.

Ah well, how ironic! You are a fan of MLP yourself...

[Macbi]

Really the lower bound would be much higher than that, because if one soup exists then there are probably gajillions of variants of it. Here's a 20x18 sample that can probably be packed into 16x16 with some effort:

Code: Select all

x = 20, y = 18, rule = B3/S23
8bo$8b4o$8bo3bo2$10b3o7$15b2o$bo13b2o$obo5bo$6b2ob2o$3o2bo3b2o7b2o$6b
2ob2o7b2o$6b4o!

19x17 parent:

Code: Select all

x = 19, y = 17, rule = B3/S23
7b3o$10b3o$10b3o$11bo7$15b2o$15b2o$3o6bo$b2o3b2obo8bo$2o5bobo8bo$5b3ob
o6bobo$8b2o6bobo!

16x16 soup:

Code: Select all

x = 16, y = 16, rule = B3/S23
o2bob2o$o3b2ob2o2bob2o$bo2bo4bo3bobo$10b4o$2b2obo3bobobo$o4b4o3bob2o$
4b2o2b3o2bo$b2o2bo2bo6bo$4b2o2b2o3bobo$3o2b2o2b2o4bo$ob2ob2o2b2obo$o2b
obo4b2obo$3ob2ob2o4b3o$o2bob2o2bo3bobo$3o4bo3b2ob2o$b2obo2b4obo2bo!