Talk:Rule 110

message: Could someone add a citation for: "Class 4 behavior," i'm sure there's some in NKS. It would be very useful. New299 13:37, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Citations Needed

message: The pictures don't make any sense to me.  What are the pictures of?  Are they plots?  If they're plots, then what are the axes?  What does black represetn, what does white represent?--ASL 00:02, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe the Y axis is time (generations, iterations of the rule), proceeding downwards.  Black/White are 0 and 1.  The table at the top of the article explains how each particular pattern proceeds into a subsequent pattern.  (Each cell's state in the next generation is dependent on its own state, and that of its two neighbors).  —Hobart 19:55, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: this is correct, except you got white and black back to front. black is one, not white Mathmo 02:39, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

text: The pictures are of the rule 110 cellular automaton. In a one-dimensional cellular automaton, time usually goes downwards, in other words, each row is calculated based on the row just above it. Each cell (a cell being one of those squares, often represented as a single pixel) in a row being calculated is either white or black depending on the whiteness or blackness of the cells in the row above it (which is the visual way of representing the row that existed one moment before it). In this particular case, each cell depends only on the one just above it, the one just above and to the right of it, and the one just above and to the left of it, and is black if the three above it are black+black+white, black+white+black, white+black+black, white+black+white or white+white+black. Order is important, that is to say, white+white+black is not the same as black+white+white. The above rule (that is to say, the next cell being black when those particular cells are black) is called 'elementary rule 110'. You can read more about cellular automata at the cellular automata page. - green_meklar 22:41, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Pictures need explanation

message: how can rule 110 be only proven rule capable of universal computation: reflections over left right yields rule 124, while switching 1s with zeros yields 145 & 131 as all posible. Saganatsu 23:50, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  only proven universal computationer? 

message: I think the reasoning behind these tags is self-evident... <eleland/talkedits> 22:39, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Argh 

message: Can someone please update?  See http://blog.wolfram.com/2007/10/the_prize_is_won_the_simplest.html
--cslarsen 12:48, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The 2,3 machine is the simplest universal turing machine 

message: This article needs to start with an explanation about why this set of state transformations is called "Rule 110".-69.87.200.16 (talk) 01:46, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: All is explained at the root article Cellular_automaton. That you ask the question is very significant. It seems to me that this page on "rule 110 CA" (and the corresponding one on "rule 30 CA") were created as "children" of the main page  Cellular automaton. It is clear that at the very least link-back is needed. I will try to do this as soon as possible. --Михал Орела (talk) 08:35, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why called Rule 110? 

message: See Talk:Rule 30#Suggested name change--RDBury (talk) 16:22, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggested name change 

message: The article describes class 4 behaviour as "neither completely random nor completely repetitive." However, given that cellular automata are totally deterministic systems, no cellular automaton can be random. Furthermore, since the evolution of a cellular automaton is computed by repeatedly applying the same rules, all cellular automata are, in some sense, completely repetitive. I understand the spirit of the description, but it doesn't seem precise enough. How about describing class 4 behaviour as "neither completely chaotic nor completely stable?" Does someone who knows more about the topic think that this is an accurate description?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.229.83.176 (talk) 02:50, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The thing about Rule 110 is that it's been proven to be Turing complete and capable of universal computation. I/O? I haven't reviewed its use in A New Kind of Science (which is free to download)... but rather than treat it generally as a cellular automata, I'd make sure any changes in this article primarily reflect it's categorization and use in the book's context, and its notability due to the Turing proof as well.—Machine Elf 1735 (talk) 03:39, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Description of Class 4 Behaviour 

message: Having implemented Rule 110 on a 1280 X 1024 monitor screen (that is, to much greater detail than is shown here) I can see the second pattern moving as described, BUT it doesn't seem to comply strictly with the definition of spaceship. To me, it seems more of a "comet" rather than a "spaceship"; in that whilst there is movement, there is no single particular shape that is repeated. For example, in generations (is that the right word?) 600 to 690 (or thereabouts), in the area of interest there is no change at all.
Old_Wombat (talk) 09:54, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is pattern number 2 really a "spaceship" 

message: The '64 possible unique' probably needs explaining.  I presume the value 64 is derived from:
256 (total rules) / 2 (for 0/1 <-> 1/0 inversion) / 2 (x-axis symmetry)  =  64  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.137.138.80 (talk) 11:43, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It could certainly at least use a link to an explanation in elementary cellular automata -- one that takes into account the cases where some of the variants (identity, reflection, complement, or reflection+complement) are the same automaton. —SamB (talk) 16:40, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Among the 64 possible unique elementary cellular automata" 

message: So, um is there any particular reason that this article doesn't use the citation templates for its references? And if it must continue not to use them, could someone please add a comment referencing an appropriate style guide for the citation format in use? —SamB (talk) 16:42, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation style 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Rule 110. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20160106181737/http://www.oldcitypublishing.com/IJUC/IJUC%202.1%20contents.html to http://www.oldcitypublishing.com/IJUC/IJUC%202.1%20contents.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 11:27, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified