Mathematical analysis reveals exact support-wave calculus and odometer carry structures in elementary cellular automaton Rule 30, highlighting underlying algebraic order within complex patterns.
Three companion papers on the regular flank of elementary cellular automaton Rule 30, with all verification scripts and data. Flagship (flagship.pdf): the support-wave calculus in the Lucas basis — OEIS A094604 characterised exactly as odometer carries of the support crest; front speed 1/2 generated by an explicit finite automaton; an exact centre-column formula (with refutation of a recently published identity); pure-transient law of windows. Grammar (grammar.pdf): classification of all sixteen family rules by locality of the diagonal grammar; soundness precondition for joint-induction certification; complement-conjugacy lemma; certified reversal asymmetry (arrow of time); the clocks of the family — four distinct irregular period-doubling sequences, three of them new; the seed-moduli space of clocks, the tail-front bijection, and the absorption lemma characterising the A094604 basin. Odometer (odometer.pdf): dyadic eigenfunctions; coin digits as literal digits of absolute time; a measurable skew product over the dyadic odometer with exact window entropy 0.680082 bits per symbol; the all-ones vacuum as the unique obstruction to a topological odometer factor. Code (Python/C), minimal forbidden word lists, and reproduction instructions included. Licenses: CC-BY-4.0 (papers), MIT (code). Version 3 adds: the anti-shift conjugacy theorem (the natural NAND pattern is the complemented time-shift of the Rule 30 pattern, and likewise for the implication pair, with all crest rigidities as corollaries); the certified ten arrow-of-time rules of the 256-rule three-argument family with seven new clock sequences (OEIS A399493-A399495 cover the two-argument family); the reclassification of the non-SFT hypothesis as a square-root discrepancy statement, with exact integer counts over full periods; the reduction of unconditional non-SFT to uniform second moments (new section of the odometer paper); and the boundary-of-the-rigid-regime discussion in the flagship, characterising the diagonal polynomials as near-maximal-degree with random-scale weight deviations vanishing exactly at antiperiodic levels. Version 4 adds: a corrected proof of the consecutive-doublings theorem (the earlier argument relied on an inequality between maxima of OR-convolutions that is false in general; the new proof uses the unique-pair argument), with the corollary that two consecutive gaps of one never occur in A094604; the deficit-ladder theorem (a gap of two lowers the crest's plateau deficit by exactly one) and a complete stochastic model of the gaps of A094604 - an exact ladder, the plateau criterion, fair coins and a geometric reset - replicated on the seed-moduli space (56,602 carries over the four rules OR, NOR, implication, reverse implication), giving P(gap=1)=1/4, P(gap=2)=P(gap>=3)=3/8 and mean gap 5/2; the theorem that the carry copies the Boolean derivative of the rule (valid for all 256 three-argument rules, verified on the ten certified ones), which explains why the two-argument class shares one gap mechanism and the genuinely three-argument rules do not; and a withdrawal of the claim that the NOR support maximum jumps across powers of two (the exact odometer holds for the whole class). New scripts: verify_crest_thms, crest_copy, gap_struct, second_step, deficit_ladder, plateau_bits, gap_model, gap_orbits, gap_orbits2, family_crest, family3_crest, family3_copy.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Daniil Fomin (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: