Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

The principle is the same as von Neumann's "universal constructor", so it doesn't really prove anything we didn't know in theory.

However, von Neumann's design uses a cellular-automaton with many more rules, and those were specifically chosen to help define that constructor (Langton Loops are a more extreme example of choosing rules to make construction easier). In constrast, the rules for Game of Life (GoL) were chosen to be simple and interesting, not fine-tuned for any particular patterns (for an even simpler set of rules, see the Rule 110 cellular-automaton).

We know the GoL is Turing-complete, so it can emulate any computable system; including those other cellular-automata, e.g. von Neumann's universal constructor. Such emulations will typically use a large GoL pattern to represent each emulated cell (e.g. see "life in life"): if we emulate a universal constructor, we can use it to assemble any pattern of those emulated cells. We could also emulate GoL inside some other cellular-automaton, and hence use a universal constructor to assemble any pattern of emulated GoL cells. But the question still remains: can we assemble any pattern of "native" GoL cells? That's what the constructors in the article are doing (at least, for a broad class of patterns).

The rest is a matter of "code golf", trying to make the patterns smaller and faster (and indeed feasible to run on a real PC!)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Von_Neumann_universal_construc...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Langton%27s_loops

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_110

https://conwaylife.com/wiki/Turing_machine

https://conwaylife.com/wiki/Unit_cell



Consider applying for YC's Fall 2026 batch! Applications are open till July 27.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: