# User talk:Plokmijnuhby

## The Insane Esolang

Can you explain how your solution to Truth machine works?

```ຯæææææθÁÁÁÁÀ
```

This assumes that if θ causes a jump beyond the end of the program, it will immediately halt.

- Galaxtone (talk) 07:49, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

So step one, take input with ຯ. The user will input a "0" or a "1", producing 25 or 14 respectively. This will also poll the RNG without doing anything with the information.

Step two is to make a jump. θ looks a promising candidate, but it requires the next cell to be quite a high value. We need to wait until the RNG has the correct value available. The language has no obvious NOP, but æ does not change the value of the current cell or initialise the next cell, so it works well enough. Executing 5 æ's will leave the correct number available to initialise the next cell.

When θ actually executes, if the user gave "0" as input, it will try to jump 9 instructions forward and jump beyond the end of the program, causing it to halt. "1" would only cause it to jump 5 instructions, causing it to land on the À.

Finally, À will cause it to jump two instructions back and land on an Á. This will make it skip the next instruction and land on the À again, thus causing an infinite loop.

-- Plokmijnuhby (talk)

I don't think I'll accept that answer, because it doesn't even use I/O. (As now shown in the Invalid Submissions section, I am sorry but I have put a note :P)

I am using the esolang page of Truth machine which also deals with I/O.

- Galaxtone (talk) 22:55, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

## Perpetuum Mobile

As I designed intended to design the language a split in wires or strings does not halve the energy going in each direction. Thus it is increadibly easy to increase the amount of energy in the system, but hard to keep it stable or reduce it. Thus I think your edit at https://esolangs.org/w/index.php?diff=55392&oldid=55390 is actually not quite correct. The language may still be turing complete though. Vorpal (talk)

--

Sorry, I looked at other examples on the page and they showed that + will add incoming voltages together. Judging by the example above the one you just added, I thought it could also split voltages, but I suppose that was a short circuit rather than a split. I didn't use that kind of split in the Turing completeness proof, so it still works. I don't think keeping current stable should be any problem, as a simple wire will do the job.

--

Yeah, + is just (up to) 4 wires being connected together. I'll try to improve the examples a bit as well. Vorpal (talk) 09:58, 27 May 2018 (UTC)