Using a stack based expression approach makes it easier to design images at the cost of being less flexible computationally. I have often pondered enhancements to make it more capable,and indeed Turing complete. Forth style word definition would work, but I also have a soft spot for state machines.
This is my favorite [1]. These are a fun exercise to program yourself. Fairly straightforward but also insightful and easy to create fun variations with.
I “clearly” see lots of dots appear and disappear. It feels direct and unassailable that I am seeing dots. But I never really see a single dot appear and disappear. (Without making a very selective effort.)
Clues like that suggest that the qualia answer has mechanistic explanation. The signal saying that we see something, directly and clearly, and actually seeing something, are separable.
Which is true for recognition of a previous experience (Deja vu), knowing (unquestioning belief), etc.
We experience certainties and experiences we deem direct, that we often attribute to reality, but the measure of certainty and directness themselves are just other signals only approximating or filling in (usefully confabulating) what we think they say.
Our experiences are absolutely full of invisible simplifications, internally created opaque illusions, of not only information, but meta-information.
They work as efficiencies because by design we do not have the natural ability to perceive or question them. No natural inclination to seperate seemingly deep experience from actually sparse internal sensory and meta status representations, or representations from reality (whether internal or external).
I forked a fork of this and added extra functionality, including rating and sharing machines, variable simulation speed and canvas size here: https://aesort.com/Turing-Drawings/
A lot of the style of images this creates are similar to Cellular Automata. Especially when you have a piece of information move diagonally across the screen.
This (along with ibniz) was one of my inspirations for https://c50.fingswotidun.com/
Using a stack based expression approach makes it easier to design images at the cost of being less flexible computationally. I have often pondered enhancements to make it more capable,and indeed Turing complete. Forth style word definition would work, but I also have a soft spot for state machines.
Little toys like these are things I would recommend everyone have a go at. I have quite enjoyed https://tixy.land/ and https://www.dwitter.net
This is my favorite [1]. These are a fun exercise to program yourself. Fairly straightforward but also insightful and easy to create fun variations with.
[1]: https://maximecb.github.io/Turing-Drawings/#2,10,0,2,1,0,6,1...
Interest qualia experience I noted.
I “clearly” see lots of dots appear and disappear. It feels direct and unassailable that I am seeing dots. But I never really see a single dot appear and disappear. (Without making a very selective effort.)
Clues like that suggest that the qualia answer has mechanistic explanation. The signal saying that we see something, directly and clearly, and actually seeing something, are separable.
Which is true for recognition of a previous experience (Deja vu), knowing (unquestioning belief), etc.
We experience certainties and experiences we deem direct, that we often attribute to reality, but the measure of certainty and directness themselves are just other signals only approximating or filling in (usefully confabulating) what we think they say.
Our experiences are absolutely full of invisible simplifications, internally created opaque illusions, of not only information, but meta-information.
They work as efficiencies because by design we do not have the natural ability to perceive or question them. No natural inclination to seperate seemingly deep experience from actually sparse internal sensory and meta status representations, or representations from reality (whether internal or external).
I'll share some of the interesting ones I found!
https://maximecb.github.io/Turing-Drawings/#8,3,6,1,0,0,1,1,...
https://maximecb.github.io/Turing-Drawings/#8,3,3,1,1,3,1,3,...
https://maximecb.github.io/Turing-Drawings/#2,22,1,2,3,1,16,...
I forked a fork of this and added extra functionality, including rating and sharing machines, variable simulation speed and canvas size here: https://aesort.com/Turing-Drawings/
It's interesting how some of them halt after a while and some of them don't. I wonder if one could figure out which ones do and which ones don't?
None of them halt, since no halting state is ever introduced into these canvas dwelling TMs :-(
I think GP is actually asking whether we can determine if one enters a steady state, i.e. tape no longer changes.
You are kidding, right? [0]
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halting_problem
It was a (not particularly funny) joke.
I thought it was great :)
These are FSMs though, as the tape is finite.
Some I liked and/or found interesting:
- https://maximecb.github.io/Turing-Drawings/#4,3,0,2,1,1,2,0,...
- https://maximecb.github.io/Turing-Drawings/#6,6,4,2,3,0,4,2,...
- https://maximecb.github.io/Turing-Drawings/#6,6,0,5,2,4,3,1,...
- https://maximecb.github.io/Turing-Drawings/#3,6,2,5,1,2,3,3,...
This one has a few satisfying phases: https://maximecb.github.io/Turing-Drawings/#5,3,4,2,2,0,2,1,...
a short film: https://maximecb.github.io/Turing-Drawings/#7,3,5,2,0,6,2,1,...
long time to reach NESS (if it does at all): https://maximecb.github.io/Turing-Drawings/#7,3,3,1,0,0,2,3,...
Cool glyphs: https://maximecb.github.io/Turing-Drawings/#4,4,0,2,1,3,1,0,...
Is it possible to work backwards and take a video and turn it into a turing machine using this format?
here are some of my best finds:
- https://maximecb.github.io/Turing-Drawings/#4,3,1,2,3,3,1,0,...
- https://maximecb.github.io/Turing-Drawings/#6,3,2,1,0,4,1,1,...
- https://maximecb.github.io/Turing-Drawings/#7,3,4,1,2,6,1,3,...
- https://maximecb.github.io/Turing-Drawings/#7,3,5,1,1,6,2,3,...
I made Langton's ant!
https://aesort.com/Turing-Drawings/#4,2,1,1,1,2,1,3,3,1,0,0,...
(Seizure warning, for many of these)
This is interesting, looks like different patterns at different levels of zoom.
https://maximecb.github.io/Turing-Drawings/#20,2,16,1,2,9,1,...
This one leaves a nice impression on your eyes if you stare at it: https://maximecb.github.io/Turing-Drawings/#4,5,2,3,3,0,3,1,...
A thread 11 years ago https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6693653
And also her article on it https://pointersgonewild.com/2012/12/31/turing-drawings/
A lot of the style of images this creates are similar to Cellular Automata. Especially when you have a piece of information move diagonally across the screen.
Why does this look like a perfect representation of TV static?
https://maximecb.github.io/Turing-Drawings/#4,3,3,1,0,3,1,1,...
I dunno, I took one look at it and thought 'this clearly wasn't influenced by the Cosmic Microwave Background at all! I can tell by the pixels'.
TV static is random. This is basically a pseudo-random generator.
Very impressive! There is something earie and disturbing about the animation, some primal instincts triggered.
some of them, somehow, look depressingly similar to out world, i feel uneasy watching it being destroyed
The "rapids" example is impressively natural and organic looking.
Very cool! Stumbled upon this curious ‘phase separation’. There’s something natural and familiar in the chaos, complexity and decay.
https://maximecb.github.io/Turing-Drawings/#2,10,1,6,1,0,2,0...