Skip to content

Mushroom Life

a.parsons.edu
15 pointssuperberliner9 comments
On HN

Comments

I ended up in a deadlock. No new mushrooms are growing and the existing mushrooms are in a pattern where they won't die. Does this mean I won or lost? ;)

It sounds to me like you're not familiar with Conway's Life.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conways_Game_of_Life

this made me wonder whether there's some function of the number of cells for which, if a population stays alive for that number of cycles, it will live forever.

for example, for a 10x10 grid, maybe any pattern that has life after 100 cycles will always have life.

i guess this might be covered in "a new kind of science" - i haven't read that. any who has care to comment? thanks.

The function you're looking for would be a variation of the Busy Beaver function, I think. On an infinite grid, the question reduces to the Halting Problem.

ah yes, you're right. thanks...

Actually, my apologies for the overly brief comment earlier, I was on lunch and typing on a smartphone.

I suppose you understood my point, but I'll elaborate for posterity: Conway's Life is Turing complete, with the conceptually unbounded grid standing in for the infinite tape of a Turing machine. As illustration, here's a page that implements a literal Turing machine using Life patterns: http://rendell-attic.org/gol/tm.htm

Starting from an empty tape, the number of states in the Turing machine must obviously be proportional to the number of live cells needed; updates to the state of the grid are equivalent to running time for the TM; and the output produced by the machine must be proportional to the population of live cells.

From this, we can (in a non-rigorous, hand-wavy sort of way) conclude that asking for an upper bound on the number of cycles to decide if any grid of a given finite size will be populated or barren is very likely equivalent to asking for an upper bound on the running time needed to decide if a Turing Machine of a given finite number of states will halt. This isn't actually the Busy Beaver function, but is closely related.

Thus concludes my proof by enthusiastic hand-waving (if there isn't a fancy Latin term for that, there should be).

Another cool one to try the spinner 3 in a row

I am a complete sucker for all things Life. Awesome!

Cute visualization!

AboutSource Built by g1lg1l

Hackerly is an independent reader for Hacker News, built on the public HN API. Not affiliated with Y Combinator.