Page 4 of 21
Re: Create your own terminology
Posted: July 27th, 2019, 10:53 am
by phdanielli
Moosey wrote:phdanielli wrote:
Pure diag ships dont qualify as the change in direction happens before completely leaving the bounding box.
If they're high enough period they will leave the bounding box before their mod happens.
For instance:
Code: Select all
#C robbed from a laudrypizza03 post on the 5s project
x = 18, y = 18, rule = B2acn3ceqy5cjkr6ck/S12-ei3cy4kny5aijq6ck7cHistory
3BA$B2AB$ABAB12$15.2BD$15.BDB$15.B2D$15.D2B!
Mod is irrelevant. At least to this definition.
Also, 100th post woohoo~!
Re: Create your own terminology
Posted: July 27th, 2019, 10:57 am
by Moosey
phdanielli wrote:
Mod is irrelevant. At least to this definition.
How do you define change in direction, then?
In a pure sense and not the fuzzy ones I can think of like "when it turns".
It will be hard to define when it turns as when the ship changes movement direction given that there isn't going to be a canonical center of the ship.
Re: Create your own terminology
Posted: July 27th, 2019, 10:59 am
by phdanielli
continuous motion of the center of the bounding box without changing polar theta as a vector expression = same direction
otherwise = change in direction
the first generation that forces a change in theta = the moment to calculate if that generation left the previous bounding box calculated in the same manner
Re: Create your own terminology
Posted: July 27th, 2019, 11:03 am
by Moosey
phdanielli wrote:continuous motion of the center of the bounding box without changing polar theta as a vector expression = same direction
otherwise = change in direction
Very well.
But then even a LWSS is changing direction since its bounding box fluctuates, and thus its center:
Code: Select all
x = 45, y = 10, rule = B/S012345678History
11.3D$8.D4.D$7.3D.D$8.D2.3D$42.3D$3BAB38.2D$2BDBA6.D3.B4A4.D.D.D.D.D.
D.D.D.D.D.D$ABDBA2.6D2.ABDBA5.D.D.D.D.D.D.D.D.D$B4A6.D3.2BDBA$15.A2BA
!
Re: Create your own terminology
Posted: July 27th, 2019, 11:06 am
by phdanielli
lwss does not completely leave it's previous bounding box before changing theta
completely leave means no cells, dead or alive, are under both areas of the previous and current bounding box
ie: both bounding boxes must not overlap anywhere
technically lwss is a diag-diag net-ortho ship
i hope my words are not hurting anyone anywhere despite the seriousness of this topic...i don't want to hurt anybuddy...
Re: Create your own terminology
Posted: July 27th, 2019, 11:15 am
by Moosey
phdanielli wrote:lwss does not completely leave it's previous bounding box before changing theta
completely leave means no cells, dead or alive, are under both areas of the previous and current bounding box
ie: both bounding boxes must not overlap anywhere
There's a fairly easy way to circumvent this issue but I'm not sure you have stated it quite yet:
Code: Select all
x = 14, y = 10, rule = LifeHistory
6.D2.D.3D$5.3D.D.D.D$6.D2.D.3D3$3DCD$2DBDC5B$CDBDC2BD2B$D4C2BD2B$5.5B
!
[[ STOP 10 ]]
phdanielli wrote:
i hope my words are not hurting anyone anywhere despite the seriousness of this topic...i don't want to hurt anybuddy...
The same is true for me. I hope I have not hurt anyone's feelings.
What's the latest definition?
Re: Create your own terminology
Posted: July 27th, 2019, 11:28 am
by phdanielli
Moosey wrote:phdanielli wrote:lwss does not completely leave it's previous bounding box before changing theta
completely leave means no cells, dead or alive, are under both areas of the previous and current bounding box
ie: both bounding boxes must not overlap anywhere
There's a fairly easy way to circumvent this issue but I'm not sure you have stated it quite yet:
Code: Select all
x = 14, y = 10, rule = LifeHistory
6.D2.D.3D$5.3D.D.D.D$6.D2.D.3D3$3DCD$2DBDC5B$CDBDC2BD2B$D4C2BD2B$5.5B
!
[[ STOP 10 ]]
phdanielli wrote:
i hope my words are not hurting anyone anywhere despite the seriousness of this topic...i don't want to hurt anybuddy...
The same is true for me. I hope I have not hurt anyone's feelings.
What's the latest definition?
cant skip generations; theta changes cannot be added together since the whole point is to eliminate premature turning
ur doing fine; my feelings are hardened due to previous harassment back in school days, and dont worry i curbed the bullying in my own school
basically the definition is anyship that changes absolute theta at least once and every change happens only after completely disassociating all parts of its bounding box with the previous phase's bounding box qualifies as a zig-zagging ship (direction-direction-...-direction net-direction zig-zag ship; replace direction with actual direction; as many as necessary)
Re: Create your own terminology
Posted: July 29th, 2019, 10:13 am
by muzik
Gluon: Any extremely tiny, very common naturally occurring spaceship, such as the glider.
Re: Create your own terminology
Posted: July 31st, 2019, 9:46 am
by gameoflifemaniac
muzik wrote:Gluon: Any extremely tiny, very common naturally occurring spaceship, such as the glider.
why gluon
Re: Create your own terminology
Posted: July 31st, 2019, 11:20 am
by Moosey
gameoflifemaniac wrote:muzik wrote:Gluon: Any extremely tiny, very common naturally occurring spaceship, such as the glider.
why gluon
Cuz the gluon is the boson carrying the strong force, and there are a lot of them.
If it has mass it's tiny.
Re: Create your own terminology
Posted: July 31st, 2019, 8:20 pm
by muzik
gameoflifemaniac wrote:muzik wrote:Gluon: Any extremely tiny, very common naturally occurring spaceship, such as the glider.
why gluon
Because not all microscopic spaceships travel at c so they can't be photons.
Re: Create your own terminology
Posted: July 31st, 2019, 8:30 pm
by AforAmpere
But gluons most likely travel at c.
Re: Create your own terminology
Posted: July 31st, 2019, 10:54 pm
by testitemqlstudop
I thought they were stationary?
AFAIK pions (which carry the residual strong force) are stationary and only move between the protons and neutrons in the nucleus of an atom, and gluons bind quarks together, so they should move even less.
Re: Create your own terminology
Posted: July 31st, 2019, 11:10 pm
by toroidalet
While gluons are confined within hadrons, they are not stationary. Since they (theoretically) have 0 mass, they move at c. A better name would probably be "electron", "proton", "neutron", or even "atom".
Re: Create your own terminology
Posted: July 31st, 2019, 11:35 pm
by testitemqlstudop
How about "hadron"?
Re: Create your own terminology
Posted: August 26th, 2019, 7:16 am
by CollinGao
CollinGao wrote:velcrorex wrote:Found this pattern and I'm not sure quite how to classify it. It's like a wickstretcher, except the wick is "noisy".
Code: Select all
x = 40, y = 13, rule = B3678/S34678
bboo13bo$boo12b6o$5o8boob3o$b3obo7b6obboo6bobbo3boo$bbo3bob3obbobb4obb
o4b5ob5o$3bobboo3bobob11oboobb8o$4b10obbob7o3boobb6obo$3bobboo3bobob
11oboobb8o$bbo3bob3obbobb4obbo4b5ob5o$b3obo7b6obboo6bobbo3boo$5o8boob
3o$boo12b6o$bboo13bo!
Just call it a "wickpuffer".
I will call it a "wickpuffer", since I can`t find a pattern of the oscillating "noise", which might be simulating a dirty puffer in a 1dimensional CA (i dunno)
Can anyone prove that this is aperiodic or not?
Reposting the same stuff in Day And Night
Re: Create your own terminology
Posted: September 2nd, 2019, 10:17 pm
by Kazyan
Non-component: A collision of one or more gliders with a rare still life that produces a different, structurally-unrelated rare. The collision is so specific that it only works on the original still life. Example:
Code: Select all
x = 14, y = 11, rule = B3/S23
9b2ob2o$10bobo$8bo3bo$8b2o2b2o$9bo$bo6bo$b2o5b2o$obo$10b3o$10bo$11bo!
This terminology is already used over on the Discord.
Re: Create your own terminology
Posted: September 3rd, 2019, 7:41 am
by PkmnQ
Pseudo-crawler
Some reaction that moves a still-life or oscillator in a way which cannot be used to create gliders out of it, and thus cannot be used to make a caterpillar-like spaceship.
Re: Create your own terminology
Posted: September 19th, 2019, 9:03 am
by testitemqlstudop
Emphatically nonmagical box: An euphemism for the magic Catagolue box that uploades synthesae to Shinjuku, after a heated argument concerning Freywa in the 17 in 17 thread.
Re: Create your own terminology
Posted: September 19th, 2019, 1:05 pm
by Gustone
testitemqlstudop wrote:synthesae
oh no
Re: Create your own terminology
Posted: October 14th, 2019, 8:25 pm
by EvinZL
box-negator: a pattern in any rule so that every cell within its bounding box changes state.
Re: Create your own terminology
Posted: October 15th, 2019, 6:44 am
by Moosey
EvinZL wrote: October 14th, 2019, 8:25 pm
box-negator: a pattern in any rule so that every cell within its bounding box changes state.
I'm assuming the latter would be a diamond-negator? This pattern would be a box-negator
Re: Create your own terminology
Posted: October 15th, 2019, 4:57 pm
by EvinZL
Moosey wrote: October 15th, 2019, 6:44 am
EvinZL wrote: October 14th, 2019, 8:25 pm
box-negator: a pattern in any rule so that every cell within its bounding box changes state.
I'm assuming the latter would be a diamond-negator? This pattern would be a box-negator
Yes, I made a mistake. Also, box-negator-flip-flops and diamond-negator-flip-flops, exactly what they sound like. The second is a diamond-negator-flip-flop.
Re: Create your own terminology
Posted: October 20th, 2019, 8:08 am
by Gustone
Moosey wrote: October 15th, 2019, 6:44 am
EvinZL wrote: October 14th, 2019, 8:25 pm
box-negator: a pattern in any rule so that every cell within its bounding box changes state.
I'm assuming the latter would be a diamond-negator? This pattern would be a box-negator
No but this would
Code: Select all
x = 3, y = 1, rule = B2a34i6i/S
3o!
Re: Create your own terminology
Posted: October 20th, 2019, 10:18 am
by Moosey
Gustone wrote: October 20th, 2019, 8:08 am
Moosey wrote: October 15th, 2019, 6:44 am
blah blah blah
No but this would
Code: Select all
x = 3, y = 1, rule = B2a34i6i/S
3o!
The pattern you posted remains a box-negator forever; That was not a requirement to be a box negator.
You literally are disagreeing on the definition of a term with its creator, who said:
EvinZL wrote: October 15th, 2019, 4:57 pm
blah blah blah
Yes, I made a mistake.
And nothing about "no, that isn't a box negator"