Comment by MontyCarloHall | Hacker News Reader

Comment by MontyCarloHall | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

>Can't you trivially force this to happen for any sequence?

No, because there's no deterministic way to infinitely extend that sequence. In your first example:

   1 3 3 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 4 4 x x y y
   1 3---- 3---- 3---- 2-- 2-- 2--

What are the values of x and y?

>Whenever you start a new count, choose a random number and repeat for a many times as needed for the trailing sequence to match the top sequence.

You answered your own question. The Kolakoski sequence is special because it does not just pick a random number: the sequence is deterministically encoded by the run lengths, and vice versa.

Pick any number that's not 4 and repeat it twice. For the next 2 after that pick any number that's not that previous number and repeat it twice. So on.

It's not like i had any difficulty coming up with that sequence i wrote to that point.

1 3 3 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 4 4 5 5 6 6 8 1 2... as an example of how trivial it is to continue to this.

I get that if you limit yourself to '1' or '2' you force the choice of next number but even then there's two possibilities of this sequence (start on 1 vs start on 2).

You are still choosing random numbers here. The Kolakoski sequence has zero randomness whatsoever.

Do we care similarly about the version of this that starts on 2?

2, 2, 1, 1, 2, 1, 2...

2, 2, 1, 1,

Again no randomness. Just a variant of the above and trivial to continue this.

This is just the Kolakoski sequence starting from the second term.

Ahh that makes sense. Thank you!

I guess you could say the Kolakoski sequence is special in being the “simplest” version of such a sequence (ignoring the finite trivial case {1} xD)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com