0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

IMO, 11:59:59 PM ET Sunday would probably be better for those who don't have time through the week.

Not to try to nitpick, but I feel obligated to point out that Haobo's solution does not wholly satisfy rule 4: "... every cell's initial state ... must be independent (barring reasonable PRNG limitations) of every other cell's initial state." The reason I suggested this clause was to prevent simple "randomization" implementations that do not provide at least somewhat convincing randomization. Regrettably, this solution's clever approach of simply using a randomly chosen 768-byte block of memory as the initial state does not satisfy this.A heuristic proof of this could cite that memory almost always contains meaningful, structured data. As a particuarly apparent example, memory often contains large stretches of zeroes. If one such large stretch were contained in the initial state, then a pixel's probability of starting dead is greatly increased if the byte(s) immediately before it are all zero. This constitutes dependence. And also a pretty boring game of life, which is why the clause was proposed.Although less apparent on structured data that's not just a stretch of zeroes, the same dependence and insufficient randomness exists in any non-chaotic data. So to extend this heuristic proof to a definitive one, one can prove that non-chaotic data exists in memory. And this can be done by citing the existence of the program itself in memory.