Miscellaneous LifeWiki Discussion

[Chris857]

What is "Template:LinkWeisstein" (which seems to be present in almost every old article revision)?

With the power of the Internet Archive: https://web.archive.org/web/20200507212 ... kWeisstein

NOTE: this template is currently disabled, as Eric Weisstein's Treasure Trove of Life is badly out-of-date and outright incorrect in many places. To force a link to appear, use the force=1 parameter.

This is a template for including links to Eric Weisstein's Treasure Trove of Life in the "External Links" section of an article. It can take two parameters: filename, which specifies the HTML file that will be linked to on the Treasure Trove of Life, and patternname, which specifies the name of the pattern as it will appear in the link text. If patternname is omitted, the name of the current article will be used by default.

[MDA]

What is a LifeWiki “suppressor”? No users are currently in this group.

[hotdogPi]

What is a LifeWiki “suppressor”? No users are currently in this group.

Suppressing a redirect means when you move a page you can choose to delete the old title rather than having it redirect to the new one.

That being said, I had no idea the group existed.

[MDA]

What is “Eric Weisstein’s Treasure Trove of Life”? I found only a few mentions of it on the forums and there don’t seem to be any LifeWiki articles on it.

[wirehead]

In the left side column of links, the link for "Special pages" sometimes shows and sometimes doesn't. For example, it shows for 204P41 but does not show for 74P127. Why?

[hotdogPi]

I see it in both.

MacBook Pro, Safari, logged in as admin.

[wirehead]

I see it in both.

MacBook Pro, Safari, logged in as admin.

I was not logged in. Maybe it works differently if you're logged out?

[NooneAtAll3]

I also don't see the "Special Pages" button on 74P127

I tried capturing with wayback machine.(https://web.archive.org/web/20260830170 ... iki/74P127)
css is all broken (at least for me right now, could be ddos problem on WM), but I think the button isn't there in the capture

[AforAmpere]

What would be the policy on adding OCA namespace pages for things other than just rules? For instance, a page on speed limits and their proofs in various rulespaces.

[ThePlayzr]

In the Density page, in the Densities of other objects section, it says on the second line:

The maximum average density of an oscillating agar is conjectured but not proven to be 1/2. The current upper bound is 1176/2087≈0.563, proven by Keith Amling in 2024.[5]

However, I am pretty sure that it should say this:

The maximum average density of a period 2 agar is conjectured but not proven to be 1/2. The current upper bound is 1176/2087≈0.563, proven by Keith Amling in 2024.[5]

But I'm not 100% sure. Can someone verify I am correct before I change this?

[LuveelVoom]

In addition, the page fails to mention “my” recent 16/31 upper bound (which I believe has been checked and found to be correct. If it hasn’t been thoroughly checked, then uhh nvm)

[EvinZL]

In the Density page, in the Densities of other objects section, it says on the second line:

The maximum average density of an oscillating agar is conjectured but not proven to be 1/2. The current upper bound is 1176/2087≈0.563, proven by Keith Amling in 2024.[5]

However, I am pretty sure that it should say this:

The maximum average density of a period 2 agar is conjectured but not proven to be 1/2. The current upper bound is 1176/2087≈0.563, proven by Keith Amling in 2024.[5]

But I'm not 100% sure. Can someone verify I am correct before I change this?

you're wrong

[ThePlayzr]

In the Density page, in the Densities of other objects section, it says on the second line:

The maximum average density of an oscillating agar is conjectured but not proven to be 1/2. The current upper bound is 1176/2087≈0.563, proven by Keith Amling in 2024.[5]

However, I am pretty sure that it should say this:

The maximum average density of a period 2 agar is conjectured but not proven to be 1/2. The current upper bound is 1176/2087≈0.563, proven by Keith Amling in 2024.[5]

But I'm not 100% sure. Can someone verify I am correct before I change this?

you're wrong

How? For a period as low as 6, you can produce a counterexample:

Code: Select all

x = 0, y = 3, rule = B3/S23:T8,2
2o$2o

EDIT: come on, why can't I stop missing obvious and very important pieces of information, am I really that stupid?

[hotdogPi]

How? For a period as low as 6, you can produce a counterexample:

Code: Select all

x = 0, y = 3, rule = B3/S23:T8,2
2o$2o

That only has an average density of 5/12.