Timeline for An intuitive reason why the "Rule 30" CA is random/pseudorandom?
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
4 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 11, 2009 at 10:04 | comment | added | Jose Brox | A nice and simple argument. | |
| Oct 28, 2009 at 19:46 | comment | added | Ilya Nikokoshev | Sure, that's another possibility, but I thought for this question we consider specifically evolution from 1 (other automata may indeed be better for other initial values) | |
| Oct 27, 2009 at 1:48 | comment | added | Alex Fink | I don't see why we care about triangular shape a priori: it could well be that evolution from generic conditions is pseudorandom enough but evolution from (say) a single cell 1 is not. Nor why the observation about 111 is necessary: don't you do the opposite for 000? | |
| Oct 26, 2009 at 23:50 | history | answered | Ilya Nikokoshev | CC BY-SA 2.5 |