ConwayLife.com

Posted: **April 7th, 2016, 11:02 am**

Fourth place, now.

Posted: **April 9th, 2016, 10:19 am**

This reaction looks strangely promising for the oblique spaceship industry.

x = 37, y = 29, rule = LifeHistory
35.2A$35.2A$31.A$31.3A$32.A5$9.D$9.3D$9.D.D$11.D5$2C$2C$28.E$28.3E$
28.E.E$30.E5$19.2C$19.2C!

We just need a way to create that B-heptomino predecessor in the right spot. (I created it with an r pentomino for delay purposes)

EDIT: And a block cleans up that other mess:

Code: Select all

x = 39, y = 29, rule = LifeHistory
35.2A$35.2A$31.A$31.3A$32.A5$9.D$9.3D25.2A$9.D.D25.2A$11.D5$2C$2C$28.
E$28.3E$28.E.E$30.E5$19.2C$19.2C!

Is this reaction (19,10)c/118?

Posted: **April 9th, 2016, 1:02 pm**

I don't see anything reappearing exactly other than half of the necessary reaction. The track disappears and the thing that's actually moving to the new location is the R, which is not supplied again for the next round (it instead supplies the H that immediately dies).

As far as I'm aware, we know of three as of yet unutilized climber velocities that could be used to make a ship. There's (13,1)c/31, which has the issue that the necessary helix has such a ridiculously high period multiple (I honestly think 16x might be better than 15x, as then you just need to simply double the period a couple times rather than attempt to quintuple the period); there's (34,7)c/156, which has the issue of being difficult to fully clean so that nothing is produced; and there's the new (27,1)c/72 climber pair, which has the issue of very inflexible rephasing.

Posted: **April 9th, 2016, 2:07 pm**

Sphenocorona wrote:I don't see anything reappearing exactly other than half of the necessary reaction. The track disappears and the thing that's actually moving to the new location is the R, which is not supplied again for the next round (it instead supplies the H that immediately dies).

I was thinking that the B-heptominoes could just be synthesised by some gliders. Since it has a 2 glider synthesis, it should be fairly simple. Block also has a 2-glider synthesis which could work out well. Of course, we need to find a functional helix...

And how does the H immediately die?

Posted: **April 9th, 2016, 10:50 pm**

Runs into a block.

Posted: **April 10th, 2016, 4:37 am**

It's neccesary they run into blocks to die; they need to create a glider in the same spot to rotate the B-heptomino to create another Herschel that creates a glider that flips another B-heptomino, etc.

Posted: **April 10th, 2016, 5:03 am**

muzik wrote:Since it has a 2 glider synthesis, it should be fairly simple. Block also has a 2-glider synthesis which could work out well.

If it's simple, why don't you try and show us a functional track?

muzik wrote:Of course, we need to find a functional helix...

Believe me, a helix is not a problem.

Posted: **April 10th, 2016, 6:40 am**

codeholic wrote: If it's simple, why don't you try and show us a functional track?

I have next to no knowledge of large spaceship terminology, what exactly is a track?

Posted: **April 10th, 2016, 10:19 am**

4G long-distance R:

Code: Select all

x = 24, y = 16, rule = Life
23bo$21b2o$22b2o7$obo3bobo$b2o3b2o$bo5bo2$2o$b2o$o!

Posted: **April 10th, 2016, 12:06 pm**

Should I create a new thread for discussing this potential spaceship?

Posted: **April 10th, 2016, 1:23 pm**

I really don't think it's worth a thread, it's basically unviable. Engineered spaceships need an over-unity reaction at their core, something that gives back everything it started with, plus something useful. For the original caterpillar, that refers to the combined pi climbers that reproduce their blinker trails plus glider outputs. For the waterbear, the climber, for the HBK, the pair of G + HB that make an additional glider (this is the gif in codeholic's avatar). Here the base reaction gives back multiple gliders less than we started with.

A track can refer to either the over-unity reaction or at least a break-even reaction that gives back exactly what you started with. If you can make something that doesn't need anything it doesn't make for itself somewhere else then you can claim to have a track, and then spaceship engineering folks might look at it more seriously.

Posted: **April 10th, 2016, 1:28 pm**

biggiemac wrote:I really don't think it's worth a thread, it's basically unviable. Engineered spaceships need an over-unity reaction at their core, something that gives back everything it started with, plus something useful. ... Here the base reaction gives back multiple gliders less than we started with.

Well, the herschel just makes a glider by itself, so it doesn't really take gliders to make directly (unless the 6 gliders required to make the 2 blocks and the b heptomino count, which I think they probably will).

I was looking more for someone else to maybe look into taming this reaction down to a workable state because I'm not the best with spaceship construction, but on these notes, it doesn't seem worth it unless someone looks REALLY into it.

Posted: **April 10th, 2016, 1:48 pm**

muzik wrote:
biggiemac wrote:Here the base reaction gives back multiple gliders less than we started with.
Well, the herschel [...] doesn't really take gliders to make directly (unless the 6 gliders required to make the 2 blocks and the b heptomino count, which I think they probably will).

It's the input gliders for the b heptomino that I was referring to. I think the block could trivially be replaced by something that maybe gets pulled to a new location, and the glider from the Herschel could be used to make a new Herschel compatible with the new location. But everything else used to construct that new Herschel, even if it is just a single additional glider, has to come from somewhere, which means this reaction is under-unity.

If you manage to find a reaction where a Herschel moves a still life, spits out two gliders in different directions, and if you move one of the gliders somewhere else (but maintaining its direction) they are able to recreate the Herschel in the right place relative to the moved still life, then it could be promising. That's not entirely unlikely, either. But most examples probably create a lot of additional junk as well, and then there is the issue of taming it.

Posted: **April 10th, 2016, 1:51 pm**

What I have found is this suboptimal reaction that drags a block into the right place, and also requires and leaves a bunch of other junk and probably is worth nothing:

Code: Select all

x = 31, y = 12, rule = LifeHistory
16.2A$16.2A$2D$2D$.2A25.E$.2A25.3E$28.E.E$30.E3$12.2A$12.2A!

Which block are you referring to? The block that kills the rest of the Herschel or the block that cleans uo the other mess from the glider/b-heptomino rotation collision?

Posted: **April 10th, 2016, 1:57 pm**

The one that kills off the Herschel. Since you're really only using the Herschel for its First Natural Glider, it's much more promising to have the Herschel recreated by an additional glider from the opposing direction (follow that line of thinking and you get the climbers for the waterbear, 13131 project, the more recent 27,1c/72 project, probably others). But if instead you want to use still lives to support the base reaction, then you might find new territory, but it's probably much less likely to work.

Posted: **April 10th, 2016, 2:34 pm**

biggiemac wrote:The one that kills off the Herschel. Since you're really only using the Herschel for its First Natural Glider, it's much more promising to have the Herschel recreated by an additional glider from the opposing direction (follow that line of thinking and you get the climbers for the waterbear, 13131 project, the more recent 27,1c/72 project, probably others). But if instead you want to use still lives to support the base reaction, then you might find new territory, but it's probably much less likely to work.

I'm mainly using it for the fact it's glider can rotate a B-heptomino round, and create another Herschel to do the same.

But now that I come to think of it, using a single glider to kill it off rather than the block formed by two gliders makes a lot more sense even if still inefficient. Here's something extremely promising I found when searching for such a reaction:

Code: Select all

x = 19, y = 14, rule = LifeHistory
16.A$16.3A$16.A.A$18.A8$.2A$A.A$2.A!

Posted: **April 10th, 2016, 2:42 pm**

Thinking we might see a 7c/38 diagonal in our lifetimes. Well at least that's how the Herschel moves, I can't even with the output gliders (16,10)c/23?

Code: Select all

x = 79, y = 78, rule = LifeHistory
76.C$76.3C$76.C.C$78.C8$61.2A$60.A.A$62.A5$72.3D$74.D$73.3D$55.D$55.
3D$55.D.D$57.D$50.2A$49.A.A$51.A12$51.3D$53.D$52.3D7$48.2A$49.2A$48.A
9$34.2A$35.2A$11.3A20.A$13.A$12.A12$3A$2.A$.A!

Here's an extended version:

Code: Select all

x = 392, y = 408, rule = LifeHistory
389.C$389.3C$389.C.C$391.C8$374.2A$373.A.A$375.A12$363.2A$362.A.A$
364.A21$361.2A$362.2A$361.A9$347.2A$348.2A$324.3A20.A$326.A$325.A12$
313.3A$315.A$314.A20$312.A$312.2A$311.A.A9$298.A$298.2A$275.2A20.A.A$
274.A.A$276.A12$264.2A$263.A.A$265.A21$262.2A$263.2A$262.A9$248.2A$
249.2A$225.3A20.A$227.A$226.A12$214.3A$216.A$215.A20$213.A$213.2A$
212.A.A9$199.A$199.2A$176.2A20.A.A$175.A.A$177.A12$165.2A$164.A.A$
166.A21$163.2A$164.2A$163.A9$149.2A$150.2A$126.3A20.A$128.A$127.A12$
115.3A$117.A$116.A20$114.A$114.2A$113.A.A9$100.A$100.2A$77.2A20.A.A$
76.A.A$78.A12$66.2A$65.A.A$67.A21$64.2A$65.2A$64.A9$50.2A$51.2A$27.3A
20.A$29.A$28.A12$16.3A$18.A$17.A20$15.A$15.2A$14.A.A9$.A$.2A$A.A!

Posted: **April 10th, 2016, 6:51 pm**

Since the reactions you propose lead to a glide-symmetric track, an additional condition for reburnability emerges, one that is so much stricter than those for other tracks that so far nobody has found a reburnable glide-symmetric fuse (aside from the trivial case of bilaterally symmetric fuses like the 17c/45 one);
For a glide symmetric track, the track constituents must move either completely parallel to or completely antiparallel to the overall direction of the climbers (which for glide-symmetry to hold, can only be diagonal or orthogonal). Otherwise the two sides will approach one another or separate from one another. It's an extremely annoying extra requirement, especially since these glide symmetric ones seem to be more common.

If you do find a glide symmetric reburnable fuse , please do share it as it would almost certainly be the first of its kind.

Posted: **April 10th, 2016, 7:01 pm**

Well, one thing closer to reburnability would be if you took away the second gliders, giving this:

Code: Select all

x = 637, y = 451, rule = LifeHistory
636.A54$375.C$375.3C$375.C.C$377.C$14.A7$360.2A$359.A.A$361.A35$347.
2A$348.2A$347.A11$310.3A$312.A$311.A34$298.A$298.2A$297.A.A11$261.2A$
260.A.A$262.A35$248.2A$249.2A$248.A11$211.3A$213.A$212.A34$199.A$199.
2A$198.A.A11$162.2A$161.A.A$163.A35$149.2A$150.2A$149.A11$112.3A$114.
A$113.A34$100.A$100.2A$99.A.A11$63.2A$62.A.A$64.A35$50.2A$51.2A$50.A
11$13.3A$15.A$14.A34$.A$.2A$A.A!

Of course, the block formations get in the way of the gliders and destroy them (they do cleanly burn away though). If that didn't happen then we would still have to seperate the gliders out again because the reaction kind of squeezes them in.

Posted: **April 11th, 2016, 11:15 pm**

I am in for selfinfluental chaotic metastable selfsimilar systems.
At the momemt iam experementing with selfstarted "afterburning" of puffers.
The best puffer i found for this szenario is the following.

Code: Select all

x = 59, y = 41, rule = B3/S23
41bo13bo$40b3o11b3o$40bob2o4bo5bob2o$41b3o3b3o5b3o$5b3o11b3o19b2o3b2o
2bo4b2o$5bo2bo10bo2bo23b2ob2o$5bo6b3o4bo26bo2b3o$5bo5bo2bo4bo27bob2o$
6bobo6bo4bobo26bo$10bo29b3o2bo3bo$11bo4bo22bo2bo3bobo5b3o$16bo25bo4bo
6bo2bo$6bo7bo27bo11bo$5b3o5b2o5bo18bobo12bo3bo$5bob2o2b3o5b3o32bo$6b3o
3bo5b2obo33bobo$6b2o10b3o$18b3o$19b2o$54b3o$30bo7bo15bo2bo$10b2o17b3o
5b3o14bo$20bo10b2o3b2obo14bo3bo$19b3o5b3o2b2o2b3o15bo3bo$2b3o13b2obo4b
2o2bo5b3o15bo$bo2bo13b3o3bo3b3obo4b2o16bobo$4bo13b3o3b4o4bo$o3bo13b3o
2bo4bo3bo$4bo14bo2bobob3o$bobo16bo5bo2$25b2o$25b2o2$25b2o$24bo2bo$25b
2o2$25b2o$24bo2bo$25b2o!

It puts a row of beehives with blinker on the boarder. The line of beehives is the "flamable" part, the fuse. The two rows of blinker have two effects, i believe. First not every glider gets its way to a beehive. This reduces the variants of afterburning. And they stabilize the contact of the afterburner with the spaceship. The afterburner moves with a speed of 4/5, the puffer itself with 1/2.
With 2 of these puffers placed in a right angle there are enough glider produced to start a new afterburner.
The following szenarios are possible when the afterburner reaches the spaceship:
1. Spaceship destroyed: Game over! (rare)
2. Spaceship changes to rake: metastable to stable => no more afterburner!
3. Beehive-puffer stops: metastable to stable => no more afterburner!
4. No hit of a glider: metastable to stable => no more afterburner!
5. Periodical selfpolution of one line: metastable to stable
6. Afterburner stops without changing the spaceship: That is the needed effekt => system leaves metastable!
Sometimes there is a second afterburner startet from its own row after a pause. (s. 5)

Code: Select all

x = 88, y = 61, rule = B3/S23
70bo13bo$69b3o11b3o$13bo8b2o45bob2o4bo5bob2o$2b2o7bo3bo4bo4bo44b3o3b3o
5b3o$b4o5bo8bo14b3o11b3o19b2o3b2o2bo4b2o$2ob2o5bo4bo3bo5bo8bo2bo10bo2b
o23b2ob2o$b2o7b5o4b6o9bo6b3o4bo26bo2b3o$34bo5bo2bo4bo27bob2o$35bobo6bo
4bobo26bo$6bo32bo29b3o2bo3bo$4b4o32bo4bo22bo2bo3bobo5b3o$3bob5o35bo25b
o4bo6bo2bo$2b2o6bo24bo7bo27bo11bo$3b3obo3bo22b3o5b2o5bo18bobo12bo3bo$
4b3o3bo23bob2o2b3o5b3o32bo$9bo25b3o3bo5b2obo33bobo$35b2o10b3o$2b2o43b
3o$b4o4b4o35b2o$2ob2o4bo3bo69b3o$b2o6bo49bo7bo15bo2bo$10bo2bo7b2o16b2o
17b3o5b3o14bo$20b2ob3o23bo10b2o3b2obo14bo3bo$21b5o22b3o5b3o2b2o2b3o15b
o3bo$22b3o6b3o13b2obo4b2o2bo5b3o15bo$30bo2bo13b3o3bo3b3obo4b2o16bobo$
33bo13b3o3b4o4bo$23bo5bo3bo13b3o2bo4bo3bo$22b2ob3o5bo14bo2bobob3o$21b
2o7bobo16bo5bo$20b2o2b2o$21bobobo28b2o$23bobob2o25b2o$23b2obobo6bo3bo$
24bobob2ob2obobobobo13b2o$26bo4b2obobobobo12bo2bo$25b2obo6bo3bo14b2o$
27bo$5bo2bo19bo25b2o$4bo9b2o7b2o28bo2bo$4bo3bo4b2ob3o3b2ob3obo24b2o$4b
4o6b5o4b6o$15b3o6b4o2$10b2o$8bo$6b2o4b2o$6bo6b2o$6bo7b2o$7bo2bo3bo6bo$
9bo11bo2$5bo2bo5b2o$4bo8b4o$4bo3bo3b2ob2o$4b4o5b2o$24b5o$24bo4bo$24bo
60bo$25bo3bo54b2o$27bo56bobo!

The most "meta-stable" constellation i found: Metastable after 2 x 10^10 generations. Then i stopped, golly went too slow on my decrepit laptop and the cpu got a little warm.

If someone with a powerful computer wants to search the end of metastability...

Does a "stable" metastable scenario exist in the constellation of the shown puffers or with completely different vehicles? It is a chaotic i know.

Posted: **April 14th, 2016, 10:57 am**

An unexpected R-based component:

Code: Select all

x = 26, y = 27, rule = LifeHistory
7.A$7.3A$10.A$9.2A8.2A$9.3B6.B2AB$11.5B2.3B$9.9B.B2.B$2A6.17B$.A5.19B
$.A.AB.20B$2.2AB.20B$3.22B$3.21B$4.19B$4.19B$5.17B$5.10BC6B$4.11B2C5B
.B$5.9B2C7B2A$6.6B.10B2A$7.5B2.10B$9.2B4.B.7B$17.5B$20.B$19.3B$19.B2A
B$20.2A!

Posted: **April 14th, 2016, 5:12 pm**

The base reaction:

Code: Select all

x = 18, y = 12, rule = LifeHistory
2A$.A$.A.A$2.2A8.2A$12.A$12.A.A$13.2A2$16.A$15.A.A$15.A.A$16.AB!

Posted: **April 14th, 2016, 10:52 pm**

BlinkerSpawn wrote:The base reaction:
Code: Select all
x = 18, y = 12, rule = LifeHistory
2A$.A$.A.A$2.2A8.2A$12.A$12.A.A$13.2A2$16.A$15.A.A$15.A.A$16.AB!

This can be done very cheaply and cleanly, for only 2 gliders.

Posted: **April 14th, 2016, 11:56 pm**

mniemiec wrote:
BlinkerSpawn wrote:The base reaction:
Code: Select all
x = 18, y = 12, rule = LifeHistory
2A$.A$.A.A$2.2A8.2A$12.A$12.A.A$13.2A2$16.A$15.A.A$15.A.A$16.AB!
This can be done very cheaply and cleanly, for only 2 gliders.

I was aware of that, but this method appears conducive to slow-synthesis, given an adequate century seed.

Posted: **April 15th, 2016, 7:20 pm**

Edgeshoots a somewhat tight salvo:

Code: Select all

x = 13, y = 6, rule = LifeHistory
9.A$8.A.A$7.A3.A$8.3A$2A4.2A3.2A$2A!

EDIT: Yet another strange component:

Code: Select all

x = 11, y = 17, rule = LifeHistory
4.A.A2.A$2.3A.4A$.A$2.3A.2A$4.A.2A3$2.A4.2A$A.A3.A2.A$.2A3.A.A$4.A.A.
A.A$4.2A3.2A$.A$.5A$5.A$3.A$3.2A!

And a few more block deleters:

Code: Select all

x = 196, y = 25, rule = LifeHistory
179.17F$51.13F99.17F15.F$51.F11.F99.F15.F4.2E9.F$51.F5.B.B2E.F99.F7.
2A6.F4.2EB8.F$51.F4.AC2B2E.F7.2E4.A85.F6.B2CB5.F4.4B2.2A3.F$35.13F3.F
3.B2CB.B2.F7.2E3.A.A84.F6.3B6.F5.2B2.C.A3.F$33F2.F11.F3.F4.2B5.F7.3B
2.A.A19.14F51.F7.B.B5.F5.5BA4.F$F15.F15.F2.F9.A.F3.F5.2B4.F9.2B2C.2A
12.2A4.F12.F51.F5.6B.B2.F5.4B6.F$F5.A5.2A2.F5.A5.2A2.F2.F2.A4.3A.F3.F
2.A.2BCB3.F6.A2.BC.B2.A6.A.2B2.A5.F3.A.2B5.F6.A.2B12.A15.A.2B9.F2.A.
2B2C4BCA.F2.A2.2BCB6.F$F4.B.AB2.A.A2.F4.B.AB2.A.A2.F2.F.B.AB.A4.F3.F.
B.ABC.A3.F5.B.AB.A.2A7.B.ABCA.A5.F2.B.ABCA4.F5.B.ABCA.2A.A5.B.A2.2A9.
B.ABCA.2A.A3.F.B.ABC2BCB.BCA.F.B.A2BCBCB2.B2.F$F4.3AB2.A4.F4.3AB2.A4.
F2.F.3ABC.A3.F3.F.3AB.A4.F5.3ABCA.A8.3AB.A.2A4.F2.3A2BA4.F5.3AB.A.A.
2A5.3A3.A9.3AB.A.A.2A3.F.3A2BCBCB2.B2.F.3ABC2BCB.BCA.F$F5.3BC2A4.F5.
3BC2A4.F2.F2.B.2BCB3.F3.F2.B4.3A.F6.B.2B2.A9.B2.BC.B2.A2.F3.3B.A.2A.F
6.B2.BC.A9.4B.A.2A7.B2.BC.A6.F2.B2.2BCB6.F2.B.2B2C4BCA.F$F7.CB2.2A2.F
7.CB2.2A2.F2.F5.2B4.F3.F9.A.F12.2A11.2B2C.2A2.F4.BC.A.2A.F8.3BCA5.2E.
B2.CA.A2.A9.3BCA6.F5.4B6.F5.6B.B2.F$F6.B3CA2.A.F6.B3CA2.A.F2.F4.2B5.F
3.F11.F23.3B2.A.A3.F4.BCA5.F9.3B6.2E4B.A.2A6.2A2.B.3B7.F5.5BA4.F7.B.B
5.F$F6.3B.A.A2.F.2EB2.3B.A.A2.F2.F3.B2CB.B2.F3.13F23.2E3.A.A3.F3.3B6.
F8.2E10.2BC2A10.A2.A.2C9.F5.2B2.C.A3.F6.3B6.F$F5.2B2C.A.2A.F.2EB.2B2C
.A.2A.F2.F4.AC2B2E.F39.2E4.A4.F2.5B5.F8.2E10.BC15.2A.A2B8.F4.4B2.2A3.
F6.B2CB5.F$F2.B.4BCBA2.A.F2.B.4BCBA2.A.F2.F5.B.B2E.F50.F3.2B2CB4.F21.
4A13.A.C.2B2.2E3.F4.2EB8.F7.2A6.F$F.2EB.BC4.2A2.F5.BC4.2A2.F2.F11.F
50.F.2EB.2A5.F24.A12.A2.A2C3B2E3.F4.2E9.F15.F$F.2EB2.5A4.F6.5A4.F2.
13F50.F.2EB8.F23.A14.2A2.BCB.B4.F15.17F$F10.A4.F10.A4.F65.F12.F23.2A
15.A3CB6.17F$F8.A6.F8.A6.F65.14F40.A.3B$F8.2A5.F8.2A5.F117.A.A.AC$F
15.F15.F117.2A2.A$33F121.A.A$155.2A!

Ones with the gray box are "useful" ones, that work without the block.

EDIT: Can someone complete this bookend-on? synthesis?:

Code: Select all

x = 9, y = 4, rule = LifeHistory
A$A.A4.2A$3A4.2A$.A!

ConwayLife.com

Thread for your unsure discoveries

Re: Thread for your unsure discoveries

Re: Thread for your unsure discoveries

Re: Thread for your unsure discoveries

Re: Thread for your unsure discoveries

Re: Thread for your unsure discoveries

Re: Thread for your unsure discoveries

Re: Thread for your unsure discoveries

Re: Thread for your unsure discoveries

Re: Thread for your unsure discoveries

Re: Thread for your unsure discoveries

Re: Thread for your unsure discoveries

Re: Thread for your unsure discoveries

Re: Thread for your unsure discoveries

Re: Thread for your unsure discoveries

Re: Thread for your unsure discoveries

Re: Thread for your unsure discoveries

Re: Thread for your unsure discoveries

Re: Thread for your unsure discoveries

Re: Thread for your unsure discoveries

Re: Thread for your unsure discoveries

Re: Thread for your unsure discoveries

Re: Thread for your unsure discoveries

Re: Thread for your unsure discoveries

Re: Thread for your unsure discoveries

Re: Thread for your unsure discoveries