4 ms·
you would have to prove to that the Turing complete part of your simulation doesn't construct a glider that has never been seen before and moves so fast that it
by jopsen 9y ago
you would have to prove to that the Turing complete part of your simulation doesn't construct a glider that has never been seen before and moves so fast that it catches and terminates the run away gliders.
It only makes sense if a program encoding in game of life is reasonably efficient. I highly doubt that's the case. But sure, ideas could be adopted.
Also having no runaway gliders is not proof of termination.
- PeterisP 9y agoNo, we have mathematical proof that in game of life the known gliders (c/4 diagonally or c/2 orthogonally) are as fast as possible, there cannot be faster gliders.
- oneeyedpigeon 9y agoBut what about this new non-orthogonal glider that we're discussing?
- OscarCunningham 9y agoA glider that moves n cells horizontally and m cells vertically can do so only every 2*(n+m) generations. So this glider is optimal, it moves (2,1) every 6 generations.
- sushibowl 9y agoSir Robin moves at (2,1)c/6, meaning 2c/6 (or c/3) in one direction and c/6 in the other. This is apparently the maximum speed possible at this slope.
- PeterisP 9y agoIt's not faster, so it can't ever catch the "default" gliders if it's sent out afterwards. If a glider is moving at the provably optimal speed, then nothing can be faster.