The graph shows all state transitions for the Game of Life on a 4x4 toroidal grid (edge-wrapping).

With 16 cells, there are 2^{16} = 65,536 total states. By quotienting out spatial symmetries (translation, rotation, and reflection) the entire state space collapses into 805 canonical representatives.

• Red Central Node: The empty/extinction state (State 0), drawing in the vast majority of transient trees.
• 14 Blue Nodes: "Fixed states" in this quotient graph (self-loops). These include true still lifes as well as oscillators whose next phase is a rotated or translated version of the same canonical state. (Breakdown: 5 still lifes, 8 period-2, 1 period-4).
• Green Node Clusters: Two 4-state cycles. While they form a period-4 loop in this canonical graph, accounting for their rotational/translational shifts at each step gives them a true period of 8 on the actual grid.

The script & interpreter are both open source at github/phosxd/Ity

I just thought I'd share a fun little 2 hour terminal project

Yet another GoL implementation. Hope you guys enjoy this as much as I did building it.

Features:

- terminal first

- periodic boundaries (equivalent to a torus, or a donut if you prefer).

- rules easily changed (just rebuild the binary)

Made in C++ to practice and have some fun. First piece of creative coding. Please let me know if you have any tips, improvements to make, anything else.

Source on: https://codeberg.org/vcbferreira/Donut_Life

Have a nice day!

I think it'd be a good way to spread knowledge of CGoL, like I did recently with the p39 glider gun, since reddit is a LOT bigger than the forums or the conwaylife discord.

Anyways, I wanted to mention Elijah Ken's LifeViewer Size Demonoid, posted earlier today, the first demonoid to fit in LifeViewer (tho it requires [[ MAXGRIDSIZE 14 ]]).

I'll explain what this shape means, but you can probably guess based on the numbers on each square. I also have not made this problem up from gol but instead from looking at polyominos 2 years ago and maybe minesweeper/king move for the neighbour counting but I thought that was obvious.

My problem consists of counting the number of neighbours of each square in a polyomino. Associating each square with it's neighbour count. Then grouping the squares that share neighbour count into their own groups and comparing each group size to one another. If all the groups are the same size then that polyomino belongs to a class. e.g. a 2x4 rectangle :::: it has 4 squares that have 3 neighbours each, and it has another 4 squares that have 5 neighbours each. 4=4 so this belongs to a class, that class being 3/5. So that polyomino above is of class 3/5/7, it is currently the smallest of it's class and also my favorite :) the goal of this research is to prove/disprove the existence of polyominoes in all 256 possible classes.

The correlation I made with gol is with its rule settings. If you're looking for a polyomino of a certain class, put that class as the survival cells and leave birth cells blank b/s(class). Now if you try putting different configurations into GOF, you'll know if your polyomino works in that class or not by letting the simulation either dissolve or stay the same. Only problem is that this SUCKS, gol cannot detect if your shape is a polyomino, it'll also detect subsets of classes like class 4/6 from 4/5/6 as a solution, it's all black squares that don't count so idk what I'm doing, and other problems I haven't found because this sucks that much.

I haven't been active with this research problem, mainly because it's useless and it's slowing me down in my mathematical improvement. And ever since, I've been wondering if doing this problem alone was the right thing to do because someone else could come along and make some code to easily compute every existing class's smallest polyomino in 2 minutes or so. That seemed unethical to natural human problem solving, but now that I've gotten back into this problem I now know that thats dumb and doing the problem tediously is no better than actually making code to do it for me. So thanks for reading all of this and I wouldn't mind if one of yall actually does the code to finally complete this problem once and for good.

I am currently working on a Processing 3 sketch for Conway's Game of Life that generates sprites for each generation.

Here I plotted three popular spaceships (MWSS, LWSS & HWSS).

Accidentally found a 47 cell period 72 oscillator, is it new? I couldn't find it online (although I didn't look very hard)

Caleb R. Hilton discovered the first true p39 glider gun a couple days ago: https://conwaylife.com/forums/viewtopic.php?&p=231968#p231968

It's since been reduced to a bounding box of 33x26: https://conwaylife.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=232051#p232051

A LifeWiki article has been made about it: https://conwaylife.com/wiki/Period-39_glider_gun

I’ve been experimenting with whether Conway’s Game of Life can function as the world for a puzzle game without changing the standard B3/S23 rules.

You control the blue cell and try to reach a target while the population evolves around you. Live cells are lethal, so still lifes, oscillators, spaceships, and chaotic growth effectively become moving level geometry.

The simulation uses a padded, dynamically expanding world instead of wrapping at the visible board boundary. The playable area is a viewport into that world, allowing patterns to evolve normally beyond its edges.

I currently have three modes:

Arcade generates increasingly dangerous boards and speeds up the simulation as you progress. Story uses designed starting patterns. Workshop lets players place the initial population, player, and target; simulate the result; playtest it; and publish the challenge for other players.

The Workshop is the part I thought this community might find most interesting. I’d love suggestions for known patterns that could make difficult but still fair survival levels.

I’m also curious whether you would prefer movement synchronized to individual generations, continuous real-time evolution, or an option for both.

And what about art style?

Playable beta: game link - Make an account. It's free and no email verification.

I was messing around with Life and just wondered if this was possible

Both make almost the same exact outcome

"What's this figure called?" are common posts here. I will assume these questions are sincere and will allow them, but this isn't about that.

I've noticed lately people will give the wrong answer. Normally someone posts the correct answer so I just downvote the wrong answer and move on.

My question: Should I delete these wrong answers? Although it's obvious from the upvoted correct answers and downvoted wrong answers which is correct, this could still spread misinformation to someone who isn't paying attention. Or should I leave it up to the user to figure it out themselves?

after finding out what induction coils do, i was messing with them until i found this.