>> I think this is just a case of a flawed proof though. I'm pretty sure
>> the *result* is correct.
>
> He's trying to prove that *his* CA is turing complete. I already know
> there are lots of turing complete CAs. I'm not sure what "result" you
> think is correct?
That CA #30 (amoung others) is Turing-complete.
Post a reply to this message
|