ConwayLife.com

Posted: **March 4th, 2021, 7:44 am**

Macbi wrote: March 4th, 2021, 7:20 am Borrowing from the Rubik's Cube community, we could use the term God's Number to refer to the the number of gliders needed to synthesise any synthesisable still life. In other words the number bounded by 4 ≤ G < 18 from the exhaustive enumeration of all 3G collisions and the RCT.

I'd prefer Conweh's Number for this. See CNWH in the Life Lexicon.

The enumeration of 3G collisions wasn't actually completely exhaustive, but I suppose 4 ≤ G < 18 is the correct range -- I think we can show that no RCT-like bounce reaction can be initiated by one faraway glider aimed at any of the 2G collisions, without producing extraneous gliders.

Posted: **March 4th, 2021, 7:26 pm**

To clarify some nomeclature discussed in Discord for the fast components collection, this is an up cis-carrier siamese bookend:

Code: Select all

x = 4, y = 6, rule = B3/S23
b2o$obo$o$2o$o2bo$2b2o!

This is a down cis-carrier siamese bookend:

Code: Select all

x = 3, y = 7, rule = B3/S23
b2o$obo$o$2o$o$2bo$b2o!

This is an up trans-carrier siamese bookend:

Code: Select all

x = 5, y = 6, rule = B3/S23
3b2o$2bobo$2bo$2b2o$o2bo$2o!

This is a down trans-carrier siamese bookend:

Code: Select all

x = 4, y = 7, rule = B3/S23
2b2o$bobo$bo$b2o$2bo$o$2o!

Posted: **March 5th, 2021, 8:10 am**

MathAndCode wrote: March 4th, 2021, 7:26 pm To clarify some nomeclature discussed in Discord for the fast components collection, this is an up cis-carrier siamese bookend:
Code: Select all
x = 4, y = 6, rule = B3/S23
b2o$obo$o$2o$o2bo$2b2o!
This is a down cis-carrier siamese bookend:
Code: Select all
x = 3, y = 7, rule = B3/S23
b2o$obo$o$2o$o$2bo$b2o!
This is an up trans-carrier siamese bookend:
Code: Select all
x = 5, y = 6, rule = B3/S23
3b2o$2bobo$2bo$2b2o$o2bo$2o!
This is a down trans-carrier siamese bookend:
Code: Select all
x = 4, y = 7, rule = B3/S23
2b2o$bobo$bo$b2o$2bo$o$2o!

^This is how dire the SL nomenclature currently is. Even the fundamental parts needs to be clarified...

Posted: **March 5th, 2021, 8:47 am**

I suggest we start a thread for an SL nomenclature project.

Posted: **March 5th, 2021, 8:53 am**

Moosey wrote: March 5th, 2021, 8:47 am I suggest we start a thread for an SL nomenclature project.

Hope that goes well, see this post:
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1452&hilit=siamese& ... 625#p49146
The point is that nomenclature is difficult and might lead to things like "(((Long long long long bookend) weld (Long bookend siamese (Block on table))) on ((Long long long long bookend) weld (Long bookend siamese (Block on table)))).
Hat siamese (Beehive siamese beehive siamese beehive siamese beehive) siamese (Hat siamese (Table on table))".

Posted: **March 5th, 2021, 10:03 am**

wwei47 wrote: March 5th, 2021, 8:53 am
Moosey wrote: March 5th, 2021, 8:47 am I suggest we start a thread for an SL nomenclature project.
Hope that goes well, see this post:
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1452&hilit=siamese& ... 625#p49146
The point is that nomenclature is difficult and might lead to things like "(((Long long long long bookend) weld (Long bookend siamese (Block on table))) on ((Long long long long bookend) weld (Long bookend siamese (Block on table)))).
Hat siamese (Beehive siamese beehive siamese beehive siamese beehive) siamese (Hat siamese (Table on table))".

Yup -- anyone who is tempted to start a new nomenclature thread should please try reading through the last several nomenclature threads first.

The thing is, it's kind of fun to write great long strings of text describing complex still lifes. But then it's no fun at all to read them, after they've been written, or compare one piece of descriptive nomenclature to another to see if they're the same object. Nobody would want to memorize the hundreds of micro-rules you'd need to know to be able to name and/or reconstruct even a moderate-sized still life reliably -- no matter what specific conventions you might decide to use.

(It would be much easier to just learn the relatively small amount of detail you need to know to reconstruct apgcodes -- that's mostly just memorizing bit patterns for base-32 characters.)

Hunting wrote: March 5th, 2021, 8:10 am
MathAndCode wrote: March 4th, 2021, 7:26 pm To clarify some nome[n]clature discussed in Discord for the fast components collection, this is an up cis-carrier siamese bookend...
This is a down cis-carrier siamese bookend...
This is an up trans-carrier siamese bookend...
This is a down trans-carrier siamese bookend...
^This is how dire the SL nomenclature currently is. Even the fundamental parts needs to be clarified...

Speaking for myself here, a clarification like the above doesn't seem to clarify anything at all. It doesn't explain clearly _why_ "up", "down", "cis", and "trans" are applied in these four cases. Is there a canonical order to the two parts joined by "siamese" -- like why isn't it "bookend siamese [up|down] [cis|trans]-carrier", in alphabetical order? Is there a canonical orientation? i.e., if I mirror the pattern across the X axis, do "up" and "down" change? etc.

It only takes very slightly more complex patterns than these to illustrate how hopeless it is to come up with unambiguous and widely agreed-on canonical descriptive names. Why is this thing

Code: Select all

x = 7, y = 7, rule = B3/S23
5b2o$4bobo$4bo$2bobo$bobo$bo$2o!

a fuse with tail and integral and not a "melusine weld eater tail", or "eater head weld eater tail", or some other equally horrible description? Add a few more bits and a few more overlaps, and you very soon start seeing descriptions that are really too ambiguous to allow the object to be reconstructed reliably from its component pieces.

Posted: **March 5th, 2021, 10:49 am**

Pointless remark: for the above sample SL, is "integral with tail" not simple enough? I really don't understand the use of "fuse" here. Fuse is usually longer than a duoplet, like Cis-fuse with two tails.

On the other hoof, what does "R-" actually mean? Why isn't R-loaf also b2o$bobo$o2bo$b2o! or 2bo$bobo$o2bo$b3o!? The common 34-bitter in LeapLife is two cis-R-loaf on double cis-R-R-loaf right?? (The R-R- case puzzles me even more. Do we need ortho- and para- for it?)

I'd like to argue systematic names are easier to read for me.

--

Double down cis-carrier on carrier

Posted: **March 5th, 2021, 11:01 am**

Hunting wrote: March 5th, 2021, 10:49 am Pointless remark: for the above sample SL, is "integral with tail" not simple enough?

Nah, "integral with tail" isn't quite good enough, since you have to damage the integral a little bit to be able to add the tail. Maybe "integral weld tail"? But that's not right either, since a tail isn't a still life by itself, so it can only be added, not welded... I think.

On the other hand, "fuse with tail and integral" also doesn't mention that the integral has to be slightly damaged. But I think that's okay -- various other names also imply "attach one of these things to this other thing, in the only reasonable way that it can be done."

The still life really more of a "fuse with tail and (modified) eater", though. You'd have to overlap an (also modified) integral onto the fuse. So the name should really be "fuse with tail siamese welded integral". And yeah, it's a ridiculously short fuse -- it took me a while to figure out what "fuse" even meant in this context.

Let's just call this thing "xs12_0g8ge13z23" instead. It may indeed be a little harder to read, but at least you actually end up knowing what still life you're talking about.

Posted: **March 5th, 2021, 12:27 pm**

dvgrn wrote: March 5th, 2021, 11:01 amNah, "integral with tail" isn't quite good enough, since you have to damage the integral a little bit to be able to add the tail. Maybe "integral weld tail"? But that's not right either, since a tail isn't a still life by itself, so it can only be added, not welded... I think.

How about melusine weld integral?
Also, can a cis-melsine be called a mermaid? For example, this would be a mermaid on trans-rotated bookend:

Code: Select all

x = 9, y = 9, rule = B3/S23
7b2o$6bobo$6bo$3b2ob2o$4bo$2bobo$bobo$bo$2o!

Additionally, I like the idea (proposed on the Discord) of calling this a moth (at least when used as an induction coil):

Code: Select all

x = 4, y = 4, rule = B3/S23
2b2o$bobo$o2bo$3o!

Posted: **March 5th, 2021, 1:26 pm**

MathAndCode wrote: March 5th, 2021, 12:27 pmHow about melusine weld integral?

Heh, not sure if you're asking me that question, but if you are, I'd better try to answer in less than five paragraphs this time.

"Melusine weld integral" is just as good as all the other options I listed -- which is to say, just as horrible and useless. Almost everyone would have to go look up what a "melusine" was anyway, so why not just go look up "xs12_0g8ge13z23" and actually know what object is being talked about -- even if you don't know how to perform unspecified vague weld operations?

MathAndCode wrote: March 5th, 2021, 12:27 pmAdditionally, I like the idea (proposed on the Discord) of calling this a moth (at least when used as an induction coil):
Code: Select all
x = 4, y = 4, rule = B3/S23
2b2o$bobo$o2bo$3o!

Every now and then a new name does catch on. If you and a dozen or two dozen other people can manage to use "moth" in various forum discussions, often enough that everybody in the discussion actually knows what you mean when you say it ... then "moth" will become a good word to add to the LifeWiki and Life Lexicon. If that doesn't happen, then I can only hope that the word stays here on the "Create your own terminology" thread, where it can be safely forgotten after a few years.

We already have way too many words that people have made up, referring to things that don't really need their own names (because people actually never talk about them except when they're arbitrarily trying to "name" them).

Posted: **March 5th, 2021, 1:32 pm**

dvgrn wrote: March 5th, 2021, 1:26 pmbecause people actually never talk about them except when they're arbitrarily trying to "name" them)

The reason that I want to name patterns such as moth and up cis-carrier siamese bookend is so I can label them in the fast components collection.

Posted: **March 5th, 2021, 1:57 pm**

MathAndCode wrote: March 5th, 2021, 1:32 pm The reason that I want to name patterns such as moth and up cis-carrier siamese bookend is so I can label them in the fast components collection.

The fast components collection doesn't even work consistently if you name end products—the predecessors are important, not the end results.

Posted: **March 5th, 2021, 2:07 pm**

bubblegum wrote: March 5th, 2021, 1:57 pmThe fast components collection doesn't even work consistently if you name end products—the predecessors are important, not the end results.

Yes, but the labels are still useful for finding the type of fast component that one is looking for. Also, I don't include components that look like they would only work in one specific case.

Posted: **March 12th, 2021, 9:19 pm**

Rhombic wrote: January 11th, 2017, 11:43 am t- prefix for any rule with S2-i34q
y- prefix for any rule with S2-i35y

Eight for any S238
Pedestrian for any B38 (regardless of whether traffic lights are possible)
"Just" for any B2-a

and quite a few others that I keep forgetting

Then, a "translucent" blinker/beacon/oscillator reaction is a transparent reaction that returns the object to where it was but in a different phase than what it would have been in otherwise.

[removed on 4/30/2024]

Posted: **March 13th, 2021, 12:02 am**

hotcrystal0 wrote: March 12th, 2021, 9:19 pm p.s. this p20 ship
Code: Select all
x = 192, y = 53, rule = Conway's Life
33$42b4o$41b6o$40b2ob4o$41b2o3$41b2o$39bo6bo$38bo8bo$38bo8bo$38b9o3$42b
4o$41b6o$40b2ob4o$41b2o!

so what's relevant about it?

Posted: **March 13th, 2021, 4:02 pm**

'Garden of Samsara' for a pattern that can be rewound arbitrarily far.

Posted: **March 22nd, 2021, 3:13 am**

I found this on someone's jacket:

Fastlife, Droglife, Thuglife, Rocklife,

Should these names be given to some rules?

Posted: **April 15th, 2021, 4:00 pm**

We already have (in alphabetical order) the FWSS, HWSS, LWSS, MWSS, OWSS, UWSS, and XWSS. Here's an addition to the family, the RWSS:

Code: Select all

x = 4, y = 3, rule = B3/S23
bo$o2bo$3o!

Posted: **April 16th, 2021, 9:08 pm**

Donald K Trump wrote: March 22nd, 2021, 3:13 am I found this on someone's jacket:
Fastlife, Droglife, Thuglife, Rocklife,
Should these names be given to some rules?

"Drog" sounds like "6" in our language.
"Rocklife" may be given to a rule with a lot of rock reflectors

Posted: **April 17th, 2021, 8:49 am**

Code: Select all

x = 58, y = 5, rule = B3/S23
24bo11b3o$22b3o11b2obo15b3o$21bob2o11bob2o15b2o$8o13bob2o12b3o15b2o$
22bo!

These four sequences:

1. Constell8ion. Forms from a line of eight (and several other predecessors; common enough that you'll see it occasionally in soups), and has eight final objects.

2. 180 loaves. Also somewhat common in soups, more than #1 above.

3. Butterfly spark (check generation 4)

4. Hole spark. One generation is a loaf with one cell missing, and other is a beehive with one cell missing. (How do we not have a name for this yet if it's so common?)

The constellation with four beehives but one of them is in the wrong place and rotated (not sure what its predecessor is) can be called disturbed honey farm.

Posted: **April 19th, 2021, 7:15 pm**

Platter: An oscillator whose stator consists of a string of n diagonally connected cells, and whose rotor permanently exists on one side of said string of cells.

Alternatively, platter could refer to simply said part of the stator which is the diagonal line and its supporting structure (meaning an arbitrarily long tub or boat for length 2, loaf for 3, and can be continued indefinitely in an infinite number of ways for length 4 and up), and the rotor and non-platter stator cells could be given another name.

Confused eaters could be considered to be on a platter of length 2:

Code: Select all

x = 11, y = 11, rule = B3/S23
10bo$8b3o$7bo$7b2o2$4b3o$7bo$2bo3bobo$bob2o2b2o$bo$2o!

Mold and jam are both length 3 platter oscillators:

Code: Select all

x = 17, y = 6, rule = B3/S23
2b3o$o10b3o$o4bo5b3obo$bo2bobo5bobobo$3bo2bo6bo2bo$4b2o8b2o!

And the pulsar quadrant would be a length 4 example:

Code: Select all

x = 8, y = 8, rule = B3/S23
2b3o2$o4bo$o3bobo$o2bo2bo$2bo3b2o$3b3o$5bo!

I know of no other nontrivial examples, for the given lengths, or for any greater lengths.

Posted: **April 19th, 2021, 10:10 pm**

muzik wrote: April 19th, 2021, 7:15 pmI know of no other nontrivial examples, for the given lengths, or for any greater lengths.

JLS found this p3 for length 5... I haven't tried any other searches:

Code: Select all

x = 15, y = 16, rule = B3/S23
3bo$3b3o3b2o$6bo3bo$2o3bobobo$bo2bob2o5b2o$bobo2bo5bobo$2bo5bo$3b2o3b
o2b2obo$10b2ob2o$b5ob2obo$bo6bob5o$3bo2b2obo4bo$2b2o2bo3b2o$8bobo$7b2o
2bo$10b2o!

(Sadly one of the tails is unnecessary, but if confused eaters is a platter this shouldn't disqualify it imo...)

Posted: **April 23rd, 2021, 3:52 pm**

Puffrake: a puffer that has escaping gliders in its ash such like this:
EDIT: Also, how can I move the NGNW sentence below out of the code?
EDIT 2: Semi-Phoenix: An oscillator which consists of some pattern stabilizing a phoenix.

Code: Select all

 x = 60, y = 21, rule = B3/S23
6bo25bo$5b5obo3b2o15bo2b2o$4bo5b2o3b2o14bo6bo13bo$5b2o4bo3bo16b2o5bo9b
2o$6bo2bo3b2o3bo4bo8b2obo13b2o2bo$b2o16b4o2bo9b2o2bo14bo$2ob2o10bo3bo
2b4o5bo8bo2b2ob10o$bob2o11b3o8bo2b2o6b2ob4o3b3o4b2o$2bo3bo2bo10bo2bo5b
o8bo4bo4bo2b3ob2o$3b7o11b3obobo2b4o5bo2bo9bobo2b2o$42b2o13b3o$3b7o11b
3obobo2b4o5bo2bo9bobo2b2o$2bo3bo2bo10bo2bo5bo8bo4bo4bo2b3ob2o$bob2o11b
3o8bo2b2o6b2ob4o3b3o4b2o$2ob2o10bo3bo2b4o5bo8bo2b2ob10o$b2o16b4o2bo9b
2o2bo14bo$6bo2bo3b2o3bo4bo8b2obo13b2o2bo$5b2o4bo3bo16b2o5bo9b2o$4bo5b
2o3b2o14bo6bo13bo$5b5obo3b2o15bo2b2o$6bo25bo!

NGNW- The amount of gliders in the amount of directions a puffrake produces. The above puffrake would be 2G2W, because every "cycle" of its ash emits 2 glider in 2 directions.

Posted: **April 23rd, 2021, 3:55 pm**

You have to use [/code] as a closing tag.

Posted: **May 1st, 2021, 9:19 pm**

Rotagonoid: A self-constructing RRO. (Not sure yet)

ConwayLife.com

Create your own terminology

Re: Create your own terminology

Re: Create your own terminology

Re: Create your own terminology

Re: Create your own terminology

Re: Create your own terminology

Re: Create your own terminology

Re: Create your own terminology

Re: Create your own terminology

Re: Create your own terminology

Re: Create your own terminology

Re: Create your own terminology

Re: Create your own terminology

Re: Create your own terminology

Re: Create your own terminology

Re: Create your own terminology

Re: Create your own terminology

Re: Create your own terminology

Re: Create your own terminology

Re: Create your own terminology

Re: Create your own terminology

Re: Create your own terminology

Re: Create your own terminology

Re: Create your own terminology

Re: Create your own terminology

Re: Create your own terminology