I just bought a Rubicks Cube, it's proving to be more of a pain then I initially expected. I've no idea how to go about solving the thing, and while online tutorials offer some assistance they are still mediocore at best. So let me know how! This is really, really, really bizarre! http://jpbrown.i8.com/cubesolver.html
Well, toy around with it for some time. First, concentrate on getting on face right (this is not the procedure to adopt in trying to solve the whole cube, this is just a method of learning). When you are able to do that, the next step is... well, complicated. So I may give further help afterwards, when you've learnt the first step.
Perhaps you should start with a 2 dimensional slide puzzle to get you on the way. http://www.flashpuzzlezone.com/slidepuzzle/kidstuff/cartoons/mater/
the only way to solve it is to break it open and glue the pieces together another impossible game: http://www.christcenteredmall.com/kids/games/connect-four/index.htm
It's not impossible. In most of these "Puzzles" once you have the initial pattern of movement outlayed, it's just up to you to then be observant of which "Macro" moves you should make to solve them. The same goes for the slide puzzle and of course chess.
What, no poll? At any rate, the most effective solution for solving the Rubik's cube involves using a flathead screwdriver.
Why not go the whole hog and just have a second Rubiks cube already solved and just swap the unsolved one for the solved one? "Now here's one I prepared earlier" - BBC's "Blue Peter"
No the rubik's cube is not impossible to solve. Not practically, not theoretically. Theoretically, since you're able to obtain a complete solution in some way (by disassembling and reassembling it even), then if you jumble it again, the steps are always reversible, so it <I>can</I> be solved. By the way, if you're unable to solve it after trying the usual procedure, then probably it has been messed with. Disassemble it (you don't have to <I>break</I> it, it's not stuck together with glue, it's held together in a certain manner) and reassemble it so that it looks like it has been solved. Then jumble it and you'll be able to solve it, if you do it right. Practically, of course, there is very little difficulty in solving it, otherwise there wouldn't be tutorials on how to <I>solve</I> it!
teehee... i know. i just mean it's so hard it's almost impossible.. but i've only tried a couple of minutes.
Somebody has to say this: If your problem solving skills are so weak that you couldn't figure out a way to get a Rubik's Cube for free, I wonder how well you'll do at working the puzzle. There must be a billion of them lying around gathering dust. I hope you at least got it in a Salvation Army thrift store for 25 cents. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! That said, it took me around three months. I had to experiment until I discovered a couple of sequences of moves that accomplish certain useful operations. Then I had to develop a notational system I could use to write down what I was doing, to plan sequences of operations, and to communicate with myself the next time I picked it up so I'd know where I left off. The obvious orthogonal axes (right angles to the faces) of rotation are misleading. If you train yourself to perceive rotation about a full diagonal axis (between opposite corners) instead, you can see new relationships and new things to try. Obviously the cube doesn't turn that way, so you have to invent a sequence of turns that accomplishes the rotation you want. The key is to find a sequence of turns that interchanges the minimum number of squares and puts everything else back where it started. As I recall I discovered a sequence of about twelve turns that interchanged three squares and left everything else unchanged. That allows you to work on one small problem area at a time. The center square on each face is your reference point. They can't be moved relative to each other. You can always put the cube down in such a way that the six colored center squares are in the same place, no matter how much you've messed with it. That fact helps you pick up your train of thought when you put it down, and it also is the key to developing a notation if you want to do what I did. Don't be fooled into thinking that the squares can be moved in pairs or fours, three seems to be the magic number. This will make immediate sense If you start looking at the cube from the perspective of the corners instead of the faces, because you'll see the squares in groups of three. And don't try to solve a face, work slowly outward from a corner onto a little bit of all three of the adjoining faces. There are a few people who happen to have the cognitive and perceptual skills to pick it up and solve it rather quickly--much less than an hour. For most of us it's far more difficult and requires a commitment. I never met anyone else who developed a way to write the process down like I did, but I'm sure they're out there. It really helped me. The value of this puzzle is the same as any puzzle: It makes you learn how to think in at least one new way. That makes you smarter, so it's a good thing to do. If you just can't do it, then go back to the Salvation Army store and spend another 25 cents on a book. Learning the technique the book teaches will also give you at least one new way to think and make you smarter, so that's a good thing to do too.
Just keep looking through the online tutorials. There are plenty of ways to solve it. Eventually you'll find one that works. Then you can go about refining your technique, and coming up with little shortcuts and finger tricks that work for you. After you get down below, say, a minute, you can look up a list of algorithms for an F2L method, and improve your times drastically. Yeah, I've seen that before. I have a program on my computer that will read in the cube from your webcam, and generate the absolute optimal solution. It's actually really easy to do it all with your fingers. Twist the top layer about 30 degrees clockwise and then twist the right-hand layer clockwise until the front-right edge piece pops out. Here's a link. Solution 2 is easier, in my opinion. http://jeays.net/rubiks.htm If you want any help solving it, I am down to 30 seconds on my times.
I wonder if my old rubiks master cube is still at grandmas house (it was 4 rows x 4 rows)? I never could solve it without cheating. I think the closest I ever got was 4 complete faces, and one semi-complete
Ok, I have to admit, that is my top speed ever. I rarely do it close to that. My average is actually substantially slower - somewhere in the 40s. I've never actually taken an official average though. That involves solving it 12 consecutive times, throwing out the highest and lowest ones, and then calculating the mean average of the remaining 10. I've never tried the 4x4, but I have attempted the 5x5 "professor cube." I only borrowed it from a friend, so I didn't actually have time to figure out how to completely solve it. It is much harder, though. That's why we solve it by layer, and not by face. There are notation systems. People try to come up with algorithms that do very specific transformations on key pieces, and there is a notation system (in plain text, nonetheless) to record it all. It's true. When I started cubing, I did gain a sort of spatial intuition that I never had before. It also helps me visualize things in 3D from any perspective. I can be holding the cube, and I just somehow know which peices are on the back face. I think I just learn to subconsciously keep track of the pieces, based on what I move. That coupled with my juggling gave me an immense amount of spatial coordination.
that blindfold video i mentioned came from you rubiksmaster. can you give a few links to some videos? especially the one-hand and blindfold solves?
I know that Chris Hardwick has some: http://www.speedcubing.com/chris/ Hmmm.. That's the only site I know off the top of my head. If you just look up the world rubik's cube championship, and you find the top 5 or 10 competitors, they will all probably have their own sites with awesome videos. Edit: Oooh! That was post 666 for me! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I must admit that I cheated and bought a book on how to do it. Much of what Fraggle said is applicable to how I know how to do it, too. The method I know involves getting one face completely correct (including the sides of all the cubes in that face), then getting the middle layer right (which only requires knowing two slightly-different sequences of moves), then finally working on whatever is left that is wrong in the last layer (more complicated). The book I got had a notational system for describing moves according to which layer of the cube is moved. For example, a sequence of moves to move some of the centre layer around might be written as: F U2 R U R1 U2 F1 which means "Rotate front face clockwise 90 degrees, rotate upper level 180 degrees, rotate right face clockwise 90 degrees, rotate upper level 90 degrees clockwise, rotate right face 90 degrees counterclockwise, upper face 180 degrees, front face 90 counterclockwise". Phew! To solve the cube, though, you only need to remember about 10 of these sequences.
