Online since 2002. Over 3300 puzzles, 2600 worldwide members, and 270,000 messages.

TwistyPuzzles.com Forum

It is currently Fri Jul 25, 2014 2:07 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 48 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: mass-produced stickerless supercubes and Super cube theory
PostPosted: Sat Jul 05, 2014 11:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2012 4:06 pm
ironically, this is not related to my previous post.
just something i've been wondering about lately.
 


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: does anyone mass produce stickerless supercubes?
PostPosted: Sun Jul 06, 2014 2:56 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2010 3:52 am
I don't think so. I can't actually see how that would work. The centres would need to have special caps made up of 5 different pieces, all with different colours? I guess? It seems a bit impractical.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: does anyone mass produce stickerless supercubes?
PostPosted: Sun Jul 06, 2014 3:30 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2014 1:11 am
I believe there is a Calvin's Super 3x3x5 that comes stickerless.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: does anyone mass produce stickerless supercubes?
PostPosted: Sun Jul 06, 2014 5:08 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 04, 2013 4:50 am
Location: The Netherlands
Yes, stickerless circlecubes have been made!

_________________
- Eric


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: does anyone mass produce stickerless supercubes?
PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2014 5:57 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2013 10:57 am
1NSAN3 wrote:
Yes, stickerless circlecubes have been made!

I don't think that's what's being asked, 'super-cube' refers to puzzles where the centre orientation/placement matters. For example, on a normal 3x3, the centre-pieces can be rotated 180 degrees and still be solved, this isn't the case on super cubes.

While there are no stickerless supercubes that remain cubic as far as I'm aware, the are stickerless shapemods that act as supercubes

As for stickerless supercubes:
A certain company produced a stickerless mastermorphinx
Lanlan produced a stickerless 4x4 Trajber's octahedron
The 3x3 colour cake (not sure on the company)

Whilst those two are the only ones that immediately pop into my head that use different coloured plastic, however there are some puzzles that are supercubes but only use one colour. These include:
Meffert's metalised ghost cubes
YX's yellow egg puzzle

I'm sure there aremore out there, but those are the only one's I could think of right away, I'm sure there are more.
[Moderator]We have said this before: We never call a company KO. There are certainly companies that make more KO puzzles than others, but no company makes KO puzzles, only.[/Moderator]


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: does anyone mass produce stickerless supercubes?
PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2014 9:07 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:09 pm
Location: Missouri
Bobinogger wrote:
1NSAN3 wrote:
Yes, stickerless circlecubes have been made!

I don't think that's what's being asked, 'super-cube' refers to puzzles where the centre orientation/placement matters. For example, on a normal 3x3, the centre-pieces can be rotated 180 degrees and still be solved, this isn't the case on super cubes.
Look for the mass produced Circle Cube seen in this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WRFNPoAimbM

It IS a Super Cube and I even explain why in the video. One issue here though is this puzzle was never actually offered in this format even though all of its parts are mass produced. This was created from a couple of the Stickerless Crazy Plus puzzles, even even those aren't available any longer.

I also have a Stickerless Circle Megaminx and a Stickerless Circle Face Turning Tetrahedron both of which are super puzzles. And those were offered in this format.

Carl

_________________
-
Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: does anyone mass produce stickerless supercubes?
PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2014 6:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2012 4:06 pm
Bobinogger wrote:
1NSAN3 wrote:
Yes, stickerless circlecubes have been made!

I don't think that's what's being asked, 'super-cube' refers to puzzles where the centre orientation/placement matters.

you are correct: i am enquiring about puzzles whose pieces each have some specific position and orientation.
however, despite the common tendency for people to refer to twistypuzzles as 'cubes', i'm specifically wondering about cubic puzzles.

wwwmwww wrote:
Look for the mass produced Circle Cube seen in this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WRFNPoAimbM
It IS a Super Cube and I even explain why in the video.

i disagree.
the stickerless Circle 3x3, Circle Megaminx, Circle Tetrahedron, &c, are not superpuzzles, given the number of pieces that are interchangeable within the solved state.

rather i would call them recursive, along with any puzzle which includes in its construction the math and movement of a lower order puzzle, such as your Real 5x5.

:cc:
 


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: does anyone mass produce stickerless supercubes?
PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2014 6:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 8:54 pm
Location: Bay Area, California
crypticat wrote:
wwwmwww wrote:
Look for the mass produced Circle Cube seen in this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WRFNPoAimbM
It IS a Super Cube and I even explain why in the video.

i disagree.
the stickerless Circle 3x3, Circle Megaminx, Circle Tetrahedron, &c, are not superpuzzles, given the number of pieces that are interchangeable within the solved state.

What pieces can be exchanged? We're talking about the non-bandaged ones here. The ones where the circles don't turn with any face unlike most of the "planet" variants.

I'm not sure about the Circle Tetrahedron though. It depends on whether it's a Jing's Pyraminx or a Pyraminx and the diameter of the circle and which axes the circle is on. Fore example, Gelatinbrain's 5.1.18 puzzle is more than just a Super Pyraminx.

_________________
Prior to using my real name I posted under the account named bmenrigh.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: does anyone mass produce stickerless supercubes?
PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2014 7:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:09 pm
Location: Missouri
crypticat wrote:
i disagree.
the stickerless Circle 3x3, Circle Megaminx, Circle Tetrahedron, &c, are not superpuzzles, given the number of pieces that are interchangeable within the solved state. 
But a true circle cube (we aren't talking about the Crazy Plus Puzzles) has no pieces that are interchangeable within the solved state.

A Normal 3x3x3 that is turned into a Super 3x3x3 vis stickers has 26 pieces as follows:

8 corners with 3 sides stickered
12 edges with 2 sides stickered
6 face centers with what amounts to 5 sides stickered.

This gives each piece a fixed position and orientation in the solved state.

A Circle 3x3x3 is a Super 3x3x3. It has 27 pieces as follows:

8 corners with 3 sides colored or stickered.
12 edges with 4 sides colored or stickered (2 adjacent sides aren't colored or stickered) composed of 3 dicontinous parts each.
6 faces with 4 sides colored or stickered (2 opposite sides aren't colored or stickered) composed of 4 dicontinous parts each.
1 core with with all 6 sides colored or stickered. All its parts are continous as they are all screwed to the central hub.

This actually makes the Circle 3x3x3 a Super-Multi 3x3x3. I wouldn't consider a Super 3x3x3 made from a normal 3x3x3 as a Multi-3x3x3 as the core (cental 1x1x1) has no stickered surfaces. You technically aren't playing with all the real piece types. Its fuzzy though as you can always deduce the centeral's 1x1x1 orienation and position at all times even though it isn't stickered.

But the Circle 3x3x3 is a true Super 3x3x3. Show me any two pieces that is interchangeable within the solved state. There are none. I suspect you aren't recognizing what the edges and the face centers actually look like on a true Circle Cube.

These arguments hold up for Circle Megaminx and Circle Tetrahedron as well.

Carl

_________________
-
Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: does anyone mass produce stickerless supercubes?
PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2014 7:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:09 pm
Location: Missouri
Brandon Enright wrote:
I'm not sure about the Circle Tetrahedron though. It depends on whether it's a Jing's Pyraminx or a Pyraminx and the diameter of the circle and which axes the circle is on. Fore example, Gelatinbrain's 5.1.18 puzzle is more than just a Super Pyraminx.
This is the one that I have:

http://www.hknowstore.com/locale/en-US/item.aspx?corpname=nowstore&itemid=9afe3676-8865-4b26-bb6a-86c233222afe

Hmmm... I need to think about this a bit. This may contain one of the two virtual cores so yes it may be more then "super" or even "super-multi". Yes... this is half way to the Augmented Shewb. Look here:

http://twistypuzzles.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=21555

Carl

_________________
-
Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: does anyone mass produce stickerless supercubes?
PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2014 7:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2012 4:06 pm
wwwmwww wrote:
But a true circle cube (we aren't talking about the Crazy Plus Puzzles) has no pieces that are interchangeable within the solved state.

but a true circle cube has 69 distinct pieces:
20 outer edges and corners, 48 circle pieces, and one core piece disguised as six fixed centres.

no other piece is fixed. how can one circle-corner, for example [and for lack of a more geometrically sensible term], be unable to exchange with another identically shaped and coloured piece?

wwwmwww wrote:
Its fuzzy though as you can always deduce the centeral's 1x1x1 orienation and position at all times even though it isn't stickered.

the virtual 1x1x1 is interesting. i do like that part of this puzzle.

wwwmwww wrote:
I suspect you aren't recognizing what the edges and the face centers actually look like on a true Circle Cube.

i'm not sure what this means...are you saying that if i marked each piece–say with numbers–, then scrambled and solved the puzzle, i would find that all the numbers returned to their original sequence by mathematical necessity?

what exactly do you mean by 'multi-puzzle', by the way?
 


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: does anyone mass produce stickerless supercubes?
PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2014 8:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2014 11:06 am
crypticat wrote:
what exactly do you mean by 'multi-puzzle', by the way?
 

Like the multidodecahedron, right Carl?

_________________
Shapeways shop


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: does anyone mass produce stickerless supercubes?
PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2014 8:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:09 pm
Location: Missouri
rayray_2561 wrote:
crypticat wrote:
what exactly do you mean by 'multi-puzzle', by the way?
 

Like the multidodecahedron, right Carl?
Ok... some definitions:
http://twistypedia.oskarvandeventer.nl/index.php/Multi-(puzzle_name)
http://twistypedia.oskarvandeventer.nl/index.php/Real_Piece
http://twistypedia.oskarvandeventer.nl/index.php/Augmented-(puzzle_name)
http://twistypedia.oskarvandeventer.nl/index.php/Virtual_Piece
http://twistypedia.oskarvandeventer.nl/index.php/Holding_Point
http://twistypedia.oskarvandeventer.nl/index.php/Complex-(puzzle_name)
http://twistypedia.oskarvandeventer.nl/index.php/Imaginary_Piece

Carl

_________________
-
Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: does anyone mass produce stickerless supercubes?
PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2014 8:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:09 pm
Location: Missouri
crypticat wrote:
but a true circle cube has 69 distinct pieces:
No... it does NOT. It may have 69 parts... depending on how you count them. I'm honestly not sure. But it has only 27 pieces.
crypticat wrote:
20 outer edges and corners
The 8 corners and the 12 edges? There is NO inner or outer.
crypticat wrote:
48 circle pieces
There are ONLY 7 pieces present inside the circles are aren't already counted for when you count the corners and the edges. Those are the 6 3x3x3 face centers and the 7th is the central 1x1x1 cubie. That is 27 pieces.
crypticat wrote:
and one core piece disguised as six fixed centres.
There is your problem... you've only seen through one of the disguises. You recognize the core is these 6 fixed centers. But the rotating 3x3x3 face centers are disguised too. And there is more to the edges than you think there is. Between the face centers and the edges they account for your 48 parts. There are 2 of those 48 parts which belong to each edge. That is 24 or half of them. There are also 4 of those 48 parts that belong to each face center. That is the other 24.

You are looking at the "orange inner edge" for example and seeing 4 identical parts... correct? Put a 1 on one of the four and put a 2 on another one of them. Then tell me any move sequence that allows you to exchange the 1 and the 2. Another way to think of it is each of those 4 parts exists in its own orbit. They can never be interchanged. But in this case each of those orbits is a piece type. There is no "inner edge" piece type... its just a part of a face center.
crypticat wrote:
no other piece is fixed. how can one circle-corner, for example [and for lack of a more geometrically sensible term], be unable to exchange with another identically shaped and coloured piece?
Because the part that you are calling a "circle corner" is one side of the edge piece (a piece made of 3 discontinuous parts). If you move that part you HAVE to move the other 2 parts that make up that piece and the puzzle is no longer solved.
crypticat wrote:
the virtual 1x1x1 is interesting. i do like that part of this puzzle.
Per the above definitions the 1x1x1 on the inside of a 3x3x3 is a REAL piece. Virtual means something else in this context.
crypticat wrote:
i'm not sure what this means...are you saying that if i marked each piece–say with numbers–, then scrambled and solved the puzzle, i would find that all the numbers returned to their original sequence by mathematical necessity?
By physical necessity. It is the exact same reason why you can't scramble a 3x3x3 and then solve it such that an edge has 2 green stickers on it. The relationship of the stickers on an edge is fixed and is unaffected by the scramble. The same is true here... but you now see 4 sides/colors of each edge... not just 2.
crypticat wrote:
what exactly do you mean by 'multi-puzzle', by the way?
Simply a puzzle that contains all the REAL pieces possible for that geometry. On a 3x3x3 that is actually 3 times 3 times 3 or 27 real pieces. Your Super 3x3x3 only lets you "see" 26 of them.

Carl

_________________
-
Image

Image


Last edited by wwwmwww on Mon Jul 07, 2014 10:56 pm, edited 5 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: does anyone mass produce stickerless supercubes?
PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2014 9:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2011 3:17 am
Location: Australia
Circle Corner = Edge+ piece
Inner Edge = Centre+ piece
Although, I suspect that novice cubers would have all sorts of pain coming to terms with this terminology, but I'm more than prepared to adopt it, and I think I will from now on. The trouble is if you're reducing a `Planet Cube` to a Rubiks cube.. Circle Corner and Inner Edge make perfect sense.. I guess it comes down to the method of reduction you choose.. the context. I will use a specific term depending on the context from now on. :wink:

The Mass Produced Circle Tetrahedrons function as a Super Tetrahedron = Super Skewb.

_________________
1st 3x3 solve Oct 2010 (Even though I lived through the 80s).
PB 3x3 55sec Jan 2011 (When I was a kid 1:30 was speedcubing so I'm stoked).
1st 3x3 Earth (nemesis) solve Jan 2011 My You Tube (Now has ALLCrazy 3X3 Planets with Reduction)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: does anyone mass produce stickerless supercubes?
PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2014 9:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:09 pm
Location: Missouri
Burgo wrote:
Circle Corner = Edge+ piece
Inner Edge = Centre+ piece
Although, I suspect that novice cubers would have all sorts of pain coming to terms with this terminology, but I'm more than prepared to adopt it, and I think I will from now on. The trouble is if you're reducing a `Planet Cube` to a Rubiks cube.. Circle Corner and Inner Edge make perfect sense.. I guess it comes down to the method of reduction you choose.. the context. I will use a specific term depending on the context from now on. :wink:
You could map the Crazy Plus puzzles to the DoDep 3x3x3 pieces. There
Circle Corners = Wings
Inner Edges = T-Centers

Even on the Crazy Plus puzzles a "Circle Corner" is NOT a corner and an "Inner Edge" is NOT an edge.
Burgo wrote:
The Mass Produced Circle Tetrahedrons function as a Super Tetrahedron = Super Skewb.
You are missing something. A Super Skewb (or even a Multi-Skewb) only has 14 pieces (8 corners and 6 face centers). The Mass Produced Circle Tetrahedron has 15 pieces. If the Skewb only has 14 real pieces possible ask yourself what that 15 piece is? Andreas calls it a ZHP = Zero Volume Holding Point. I call it a Virtual Piece. The Skewb by the way has 2 Virtial Pieces possible... this Mass Produced Circle Tetrahedron only contains one of them.

Carl

_________________
-
Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: does anyone mass produce stickerless supercubes?
PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2014 9:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 8:54 pm
Location: Bay Area, California
I have highlighted two edges and two centers on a Circle 3x3x3. This should make it clear that a Circle 3x3x3 is just a Super 3x3x3 (and also a 1x1x1 core).
Attachment:
circle_cube_super_cube.png
circle_cube_super_cube.png [ 15.92 KiB | Viewed 1202 times ]

_________________
Prior to using my real name I posted under the account named bmenrigh.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: mass-produced stickerless supercubes and Super cube theory
PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2014 9:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2012 4:06 pm
this thread took an unexpectedly fascinating turn.
Carl & Brandon, thank you both very much!

i'm going to dig out my Circle Cube and draw some diagrams...

:cc:
 


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: mass-produced stickerless supercubes and Super cube theory
PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2014 9:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2011 3:17 am
Location: Australia
wwwmwww wrote:
Burgo wrote:
Circle Corner = Edge+ piece
Inner Edge = Centre+ piece
Although, I suspect that novice cubers would have all sorts of pain coming to terms with this terminology, but I'm more than prepared to adopt it, and I think I will from now on. The trouble is if you're reducing a `Planet Cube` to a Rubiks cube.. Circle Corner and Inner Edge make perfect sense.. I guess it comes down to the method of reduction you choose.. the context. I will use a specific term depending on the context from now on. :wink:
You could map the Crazy Plus puzzles to the DoDep 3x3x3 pieces. There
Circle Corners = Wings
Inner Edges = T-Centers

Even on the Crazy Plus puzzles a "Circle Corner" is NOT a corner and an "Inner Edge" is NOT an edge.

Within the Crazy Puzzles this depends on the context, because I can reduce the puzzle to either a Circle Cube or a Rubiks Cube.. it's a Schrodinger's cube.. it's both at the same time depending on how (or possibly if) you look at it :lol: Sometimes it's possible to reduce it to both a Circle Cube and a Rubks Cube in the same solve. When it's in the form of a Rubiks Cube, where the Outer Edges are bandaged to Inner Edges, the Inner edge is not acting as a Centre+, and likewise, on a 1face a Circle Corner is not an Edge+.. it's the `Inner Circle of the Corner Piece`. This is what's fascinating to me about the Crazy series.
Burgo wrote:
The Mass Produced Circle Tetrahedrons function as a Super Tetrahedron = Super Skewb.
You are missing something. A Super Skewb (or even a Multi-Skewb) only has 14 pieces (8 corners and 6 face centers). The Mass Produced Circle Tetrahedron has 15 pieces. If the Skewb only has 14 real pieces possible ask yourself what that 15 piece is? Andreas calls it a ZHP = Zero Volume Holding Point. I call it a Virtual Piece. The Skewb by the way has 2 Virtial Pieces possible... this Mass Produced Circle Tetrahedron only contains one of them.

My understanding of the Virtual Core in the Skewb is the `idea that` the core `could be` attached to the `unfixed centres`, and the puzzle would function exactly the same.. So it is `as if` there are 2x cores present inside the puzzle, although `in reality` there is only 1 core.. is this correct? Because that's what I've always thought the meaning was.

Carl

_________________
1st 3x3 solve Oct 2010 (Even though I lived through the 80s).
PB 3x3 55sec Jan 2011 (When I was a kid 1:30 was speedcubing so I'm stoked).
1st 3x3 Earth (nemesis) solve Jan 2011 My You Tube (Now has ALLCrazy 3X3 Planets with Reduction)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: mass-produced stickerless supercubes and Super cube theory
PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2014 10:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 8:54 pm
Location: Bay Area, California
For what it's worth, I just checked both of Gelatinbrain's Circle Skewbs (3.2.9 and 3.2.10). Neither is a perfect Super Skewb or Super-Multi-Skewb.

3.2.9 has:
  • 8 corners that move just like Skewb corners but don't twist just like them
  • 24 three-grip pieces where each of the three grips share the same face
  • 12 Dino edges

3.2.10 has:
  • 8 Skewb corners
  • 8 Inverted Skewb corners that behave almost the exact same way
  • 6 Super Skewb centers (orientation visible)

_________________
Prior to using my real name I posted under the account named bmenrigh.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: mass-produced stickerless supercubes and Super cube theory
PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2014 10:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:09 pm
Location: Missouri
Burgo wrote:
My understanding of the Virtual Core in the Skewb is the `idea that` the core `could be` attached to the `unfixed centres`, and the puzzle would function exactly the same.. So it is `as if` there are 2x cores present inside the puzzle, although `in reality` there is only 1 core.. is this correct? Because that's what I've always thought the meaning was.
Yes that is basically it. It is possible to put BOTH virtual pieces in this puzzle. One of these days I need to get this puzzle into Solidworks. See my Augmented Skewb.

http://twistypuzzles.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=21555

The Skewb is also by far the most simple example of Virtual Pieces. They can get much much trickier to understand.

Carl

_________________
-
Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: mass-produced stickerless supercubes and Super cube theory
PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2014 11:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 8:54 pm
Location: Bay Area, California
wwwmwww wrote:
The Skewb is also by far the most simple example of Virtual Pieces. They can get much much trickier to understand.
Hey Carl, I don't want to side-track this thread too much more but I have a question regarding Real, Virtual, and Imaginary pieces.

I understand what "real" pieces are.

I understand the analysis you and Andreas did where you discovered "virtual" pieces in that you enumerated every type of piece that could serve as a fixed "holding point" or core.

I understand that there can be pieces that could never serve as a holding point because they always move or must move in some situations (anti-core is the most obvious example). Are these "imaginary" pieces?

I also understand how to enumerate every possible piece type for a puzzle like the Complex 3x3x3.

What I'm hung up on is this: Are virtual pieces a subset of imaginary pieces? The reason I ask is because a Complex puzzle is the real pieces + the imaginary pieces and the way we've been treating complex puzzles is that they actually contain every type of pieces, real, virtual, imaginary. One could conceive of a puzzle that has the real and the imaginary pieces but not the virtual ones unless the virtual pieces are just a subset of the imaginary pieces.

Also, for the Skewb, the two virtual pieces you identified both have zero volume. You couldn't actually use these to hold the puzzle (but that seems like an overly pedantic point).

Here are the definitions I'm inclined to use so please let me know your thoughts on these.

Real pieces: pieces you can actually touch

Virtual pieces: pieces that have >= 0 volume and aren't physically contradictory but you can't touch them because they're hidden inside of the puzzle or have zero volume

Imaginary pieces: pieces that make no physical sense and could never physically exist or, if they did exist, they'd have to be made up of discontinuous parts not connected together

Under these definition we'd have to adjust the "Complex Puzzle" definition to actually mean Real + Virtual + Imaginary (every possible piece type).

_________________
Prior to using my real name I posted under the account named bmenrigh.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: mass-produced stickerless supercubes and Super cube theory
PostPosted: Tue Jul 08, 2014 5:36 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2013 10:57 am
Should we make another thread about this? This discussion has kinda derailed. :)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: mass-produced stickerless supercubes and Super cube theory
PostPosted: Tue Jul 08, 2014 7:18 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 6:07 am
Location: Germany, Bavaria
Bobinogger wrote:
Should we make another thread about this? This discussion has kinda derailed. :)
Because crypticat has started this thread and he finds it derailed in an interesting way, I'll leave it as it is.
I'm not sure what the title of such new thread could be and which of the above posts should go there.

For now, I'm just going to change the title a bit.

_________________
My collection at: http://sites.google.com/site/twistykon/home


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: mass-produced stickerless supercubes and Super cube theory
PostPosted: Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:07 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:09 pm
Location: Missouri
Brandon Enright wrote:
wwwmwww wrote:
The Skewb is also by far the most simple example of Virtual Pieces. They can get much much trickier to understand.
Hey Carl, I don't want to side-track this thread too much more but I have a question regarding Real, Virtual, and Imaginary pieces.

I understand what "real" pieces are.
Oh Brandon... you love to ask the hard questions. To answer this properly will take more then the time I have now but here are some quite highlights.

The core of a 3x3x3 is "real" so you are off on the wrong foot already.

Yes, the virtual pieces are a subset of the imaginary.

Andreas talks about NHP (Non-Holding Point pieces) and ZHP (Zero-volume Holding Point pieces). Both of these sets constitute the imaginary pieces. The ZHP pieces are the virtual pieces.

Some theories of mine:
(1) I think all the ZHP pieces could me made physically with the correct choice of circle cube techniques. However aside from the Shewb... the simplest such example I believe it to be almost impossible to make all the ZHP point physically at the same time in any other geometry.
(2) The NHP (your anti-core example would be one) need something even more. Circle cube techniques alone can't make them real.

Discontinuous parts and Imaginary parts have nothing to do with each other. My Double Circle Real 5x5x5 contains many discontinuous parts but every one of them is real. The Complex 4x4x4 (which we have discussed elsewhere) has many many Complex Pieces. In the virtual model that we have discussed all of then are a single part, non of them are discontinuous. Even in the typical model of the Complex 3x3x3 when the central slice turn moves with each face the anti-core is a single cubie. The real core is 8 cubies.

So Real+Virtual+Imaginary = Real+Imaginary.

or Imaginary = ZHP+NHP of you prefer.

Carl

_________________
-
Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: mass-produced stickerless supercubes and Super cube theo
PostPosted: Tue Jul 08, 2014 11:06 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2012 4:06 pm
not to belabour the question, but since we've drifted into terminology (which was very useful and interesting -- thank you again, Carl), perhaps someone could elaborate on what a supercube is. i find no mention of it in the twistypedia.

my understanding of the term matches what Bobinogger said above, which i will elaborate on slightly: that the solution of the puzzle is dependent on both the accurate position and orientation of one or more sets of identical pieces which, if given only one marking (colour, &c), can be unknowingly interchanged within the set.
at least this is how i've always heard the term used.

if this is accurate, how can the Circle Cube be a supercube, if the position and orientation of its pieces is neither visible, nor controllable if they were visible?
if two components of an edge simply cannot be interchanged, then they do not require attention.
 


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: mass-produced stickerless supercubes and Super cube theo
PostPosted: Tue Jul 08, 2014 11:16 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2014 11:06 am
crypticat wrote:
not to belabour the question, but since we've drifted into terminology (which was very useful and interesting -- thank you again, Carl), perhaps someone could elaborate on what a supercube is. i find no mention of it in the twistypedia.

my understanding of the term matches what Bobinogger said above, which i will elaborate on slightly: that the solution of the puzzle is dependent on both the accurate position and orientation of one or more sets of identical pieces which, if given only one marking (colour, &c), can be unknowingly interchanged within the set.
at least this is how i've always heard the term used.

if this is accurate, how can the Circle Cube be a supercube, if the position and orientation of its pieces is neither visible, nor controllable if they were visible?
if two components of an edge simply cannot be interchanged, then they do not require attention.
 

But the orientation of pieces is visible. There are discontinuous parts that can't be separated and function as one piece on the super 3x3. See Brandon's picture to see what these discontinuous parts are.

_________________
Shapeways shop


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: mass-produced stickerless supercubes and Super cube theo
PostPosted: Tue Jul 08, 2014 11:29 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2012 4:06 pm
rayray_2561 wrote:
But the orientation of pieces is visible. There are discontinuous parts that can't be separated and function as one piece on the super 3x3. See Brandon's picture to see what these discontinuous parts are.

but if they are inseparable, and function as one piece, then their function within the puzzle is no different than an edge piece on a simple 3x3x3.
i understand the complexity of it (or at least i'm beginning to...it's still a little fuzzy for me), but what i'm saying is that if they are not distinct pieces that can be exchanged—if a smaller corner piece is physically bound to one specific larger corner within an orbit, and a smaller edge piece to one specific larger edge—then, although the complexity of the puzzle is increased, it is not technically a 'supercube'.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: mass-produced stickerless supercubes and Super cube theo
PostPosted: Tue Jul 08, 2014 11:37 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2012 4:06 pm
okay, i found the entry for super[puzzle]...but i think it needs some revision.

according to the definition,
  A puzzle where each piece of the named puzzle has a fixed orientation and position in the solved state,
wouldn't all 2x2 cubes be super 2x2's?
 


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: mass-produced stickerless supercubes and Super cube theo
PostPosted: Tue Jul 08, 2014 11:50 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:09 pm
Location: Missouri
crypticat wrote:
okay, i found the entry for super[puzzle]...but i think it needs some revision.

according to the definition,
  A puzzle where each piece of the named puzzle has a fixed orientation and position in the solved state,
wouldn't all 2x2 cubes be super 2x2's?
 
Yes... your typical 2x2x2 is a Super-2x2x2. It is also a Multi-2x2x2. And you can even call it the Complex-2x2x2 if you want to as the 2x2x2 doesn't have any imaginary pieces.

Why do you think this needs revision? Are you thinking of these?
http://twistypuzzles.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=27446

Technically those aren't 2x2x2's and I personally view that as sloppy naming. What those are... are Edgeless Super 3x3x3's. They are super puzzles as each solvable piece has a fixed orientation and position in the solved state but 2x2x2's do NOT contain face centers. Period.

Carl

_________________
-
Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: mass-produced stickerless supercubes and Super cube theo
PostPosted: Tue Jul 08, 2014 11:59 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2012 4:06 pm
wwwmwww wrote:
Why do you think this needs revision? Are you thinking of these?
http://twistypuzzles.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=27446
Technically those aren't 2x2x2's and I personally view that as sloppy naming.l

no, i wasn't thinking of those...and i tend to agree with you about the name.

my impression is that a [puzzle] and a super[puzzle] are two distinct levels of complexity, and that, in the case of a 2x2, this additional level of complexity is simply not possible.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: mass-produced stickerless supercubes and Super cube theo
PostPosted: Tue Jul 08, 2014 12:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 7:03 am
Location: Koblenz, Germany
Nice occasion to go back to theory.
I can't believe the first thread about the ZHPs is already 5 years old.
Brandon Enright wrote:
I understand that there can be pieces that could never serve as a holding point because they always move or must move in some situations (anti-core is the most obvious example). Are these "imaginary" pieces?

I also understand how to enumerate every possible piece type for a puzzle like the Complex 3x3x3.

What I'm hung up on is this: Are virtual pieces a subset of imaginary pieces? The reason I ask is because a Complex puzzle is the real pieces + the imaginary pieces and the way we've been treating complex puzzles is that they actually contain every type of pieces, real, virtual, imaginary. One could conceive of a puzzle that has the real and the imaginary pieces but not the virtual ones unless the virtual pieces are just a subset of the imaginary pieces.
Carl answered this in a way which makes perfectly sense.
Years ago I asked myself the same question because the NxNxNs do not have ZHPs.
That was my reason to create the new terms which are hopefully self-explanatory and easy to abbreviate.
Brandon Enright wrote:
Also, for the Skewb, the two virtual pieces you identified both have zero volume. You couldn't actually use these to hold the puzzle (but that seems like an overly pedantic point).
The two pieces of the skewb could be used as holding points if you made the visible. Thats why I renamed them ZHP= Zero-volume Holding Point pieces => They can serve as holding point but have zero volume when you allow only planar, parallel, equidistant cuts.
Brandon Enright wrote:
Real pieces: pieces you can actually touch.
That is true, but only when you restrict yourself to "traditional" puzzles => planar, parallel, equidistant cuts.
Brandon Enright wrote:
Virtual pieces: pieces that have >= 0 volume and aren't physically contradictory but you can't touch them because they're hidden inside of the puzzle or have zero volume
ZHP (aka virtual pieces) have =0 (not >=0) volume in traditional puzzles. I do not know what you mean with "not physically contradictory" but I guess you mean "a gripping pattern can be named". If they are hidden or not is irrelevant.

Thinking again about the names I now think some additional definitions and abbreviations might be useful:
RVP = RealVolume pieces
ZHP = ZeroVolumeHoldingPoint pieces
NHP = NonHoldingPoint pieces
HP = HoldingPoint pieces = RVP+ZHP
ZP = ZeroVolume pieces = ZHP+NHP (aka imaginary)
P = Pieces = RVP+ZHP+NHP


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: mass-produced stickerless supercubes and Super cube theo
PostPosted: Tue Jul 08, 2014 12:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:09 pm
Location: Missouri
crypticat wrote:
but if they are inseparable, and function as one piece, then their function within the puzzle is no different than an edge piece on a simple 3x3x3.
Correct...
crypticat wrote:
i understand the complexity of it (or at least i'm beginning to...it's still a little fuzzy for me), but what i'm saying is that if they are not distinct pieces that can be exchanged—if a smaller corner piece is physically bound to one specific larger corner within an orbit, and a smaller edge piece to one specific larger edge—then, although the complexity of the puzzle is increased, it is not technically a 'supercube'.
I'm lost. The part you are calling "smaller corner piece" I believe is the side of an edge. It is NOT physically bound to one specific larger corner. And the "smaller edge piece" is NOT physically bound to a "larger edge piece". These arguments make no sense.

Let's ask this another way. Say you have a Stickered Super 3x3x3 and you remove the black plastic and are just left with the stickers floating in space. If these stickers still move in the same manner do they constitute a Super 3x3x3 in your opinion. On each face you have 9 identical stickers but there is no move that allows you to just interchange any two on them without other stickers on the puzzle moving. I would say yes... this is still a super 3x3x3. Your argument seems to be that since the stickers are identical it can't be a super puzzle and I don't understand that logic.

Carl

_________________
-
Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: mass-produced stickerless supercubes and Super cube theo
PostPosted: Tue Jul 08, 2014 12:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:09 pm
Location: Missouri
crypticat wrote:
no, i wasn't thinking of those...and i tend to agree with you about the name.

my impression is that a [puzzle] and a super[puzzle] are two distinct levels of complexity, and that, in the case of a 2x2, this additional level of complexity is simply not possible.
Oh... that is easy. Yes it is two levels of complexity and it IS possible to make a 2x2x2 that isn't super. Look at this one:

http://twistypuzzles.com/cgi-bin/puzzle.cgi?pkey=2672

Take the letters off and you still have a 2x2x2. However it isn't super and is much easier to solve then a super 2x2x2.

Carl

_________________
-
Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: mass-produced stickerless supercubes and Super cube theo
PostPosted: Tue Jul 08, 2014 12:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:09 pm
Location: Missouri
Andreas Nortmann wrote:
Brandon Enright wrote:
Real pieces: pieces you can actually touch.
That is true, but only when you restrict yourself to "traditional" puzzles => planar, parallel, equidistant cuts.
I agree with everything except maybe this statement. It depends on what Brandon means by "touch". The 1x1x1 inside a 3x3x3 could be considered untouchable as the other pieces block access to it in a planar, parallel, equidistant cut 3x3x3. Yet this piece is real. Think of the planer cuts as dividing up all of 3D space into pieces. Any piece that has a positive volume is Real, be that a surface piece of the puzzle or not.

Carl

P.S. Oh... and all cuts of a given order need to be equidistant from the origin. When you get to higher order puzzles you may need to vary the relative depth of the different order cuts in order to give all the Real Pieces positive volume. In other words... not all the Real pieces may exist at the same time. But if they can be made to exist just by varying the relative depths then I would consider them Real.

_________________
-
Image

Image


Last edited by wwwmwww on Tue Jul 08, 2014 12:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: mass-produced stickerless supercubes and Super cube theo
PostPosted: Tue Jul 08, 2014 12:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 8:54 pm
Location: Bay Area, California
wwwmwww wrote:
Andreas Nortmann wrote:
Brandon Enright wrote:
Real pieces: pieces you can actually touch.
That is true, but only when you restrict yourself to "traditional" puzzles => planar, parallel, equidistant cuts.
I agree with everything except maybe this statement. It depends on what Brandon means by "touch". The 1x1x1 inside a 3x3x3 could be considered untouchable as the other pieces block access to it in a planar, parallel, equidistant cut 3x3x3. Yet this piece is real. Think of the planer cuts as dividing up all of 3D space into pieces. Any piece that has a positive volume is Real, be that a surface piece of the puzzle or not.

My notion of a real piece being a piece that you can touch is not important at all. As you point out, with different cut depths or with circles you can turn a piece you can't touch into one you can (the core of a 3x3x3 on the circle 3x3x3 is a good example).

It turns out my thinking on the terminology wasn't far off from yours and Andreas's and your clarifications make sense.

_________________
Prior to using my real name I posted under the account named bmenrigh.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: mass-produced stickerless supercubes and Super cube theo
PostPosted: Tue Jul 08, 2014 12:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2012 4:06 pm
wwwmwww wrote:
I'm lost. The part you are calling "smaller corner piece" I believe is the side of an edge. It is NOT physically bound to one specific larger corner. And the "smaller edge piece" is NOT physically bound to a "larger edge piece". These arguments make no sense.

by 'smaller corner piece' i refer to that piece within the part of the circle that intersects the corner piece of the cube. there are three of them.
by 'smaller edge piece', likewise i refer to that piece within the part of the circle that intersects the edge piece of the cube. there are two.
...but we should use the same terminology...what are the proper terms for these pieces?
by 'physically bound', i mean, for example, constrained to an orbit, and not interchangeable with another identical piece. is this not how you described them?

wwwmwww wrote:
Let's ask this another way. Say you have a Stickered Super 3x3x3 and you remove the black plastic and are just left with the stickers floating in space. If these stickers still move in the same manner do they constitute a Super 3x3x3 in your opinion. On each face you have 9 identical stickers but there is no move that allows you to just interchange any two on them without other stickers on the puzzle moving. I would say yes... this is still a super 3x3x3. Your argument seems to be that since the stickers are identical it can't be a super puzzle and I don't understand that logic.

my argument is this:

1) the general use of the term 'supercube' involves some active placement and orientation of certain pieces during the solution;
2) the pieces in question, on a structurally identical puzzle having fewer or less complex markings, would not require such attention;
3) if these pieces are self-placing and/or self-orienting, then these actions are effectively not part of the solution, just as if they had less complex markings that did not describe their position or orientation.

of course, this argument presumes that a super[puzzle] is necessarily a modification of the markings of a [puzzle], and that one cannot be identical to the other.
 


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: mass-produced stickerless supercubes and Super cube theo
PostPosted: Tue Jul 08, 2014 1:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 8:54 pm
Location: Bay Area, California
crypticat wrote:
[...]perhaps someone could elaborate on what a supercube is [...]
my understanding of the term [...] that the solution of the puzzle is dependent on both the accurate position and orientation of one or more sets of identical pieces which, if given only one marking (colour, &c), can be unknowingly interchanged within the set.

The term "super" cube comes from the idea of a "superset" -- a set that is greater than or equal to the current set and fully contains the current set.

You can think of every position reachable by a puzzle to be some set of positions. If there is some way to mark the pieces on the puzzle so that you can see more positions then you make the set much larger (it becomes a superset of the original set).

The general use of "super-puzzle" tends to mean the largest set of positions you can make out of the puzzle if you mark every piece uniquely to show position and orientation. This eliminates the duplicate states and makes the distinct reachable positions as large as possible.

In the case of the Rubik's Cube, the 6 face centers don't show orientation so the set of positions reachable by the 3x3x3 is 2048 time smaller than the set of positions reachable if you could see the orientation of the centers.

So, if you mark the centers of a 3x3x3 you now have the super set and people call that puzzle a "super 3x3x3".

In math:

? ((8! * 12!) / 2) * (3^8 / 3) * (2^12 / 2)
%1 = 43252003274489856000

? ((8! * 12!) / 2) * (3^8 / 3) * (2^12 / 2) * (4^6 / 2)
%2 = 88580102706155225088000

? %2 / %1
%4 = 2048

crypticat wrote:
if this is accurate, how can the Circle Cube be a supercube, if the position and orientation of its pieces is neither visible, nor controllable if they were visible?
if two components of an edge simply cannot be interchanged, then they do not require attention.

The only pieces you need to mark on a 3x3x3 to eliminate duplicate states is the orientation of the centers. You're right that the little circle-cut corner wedges that are "attached" to the edges don't add anything new. The circle-cut edge dome pieces that are "attached" to the 3x3x3 face centers DO add something new though. They are enough to see the orientation of the face centers and therefor the Circle 3x3x3 doesn't have any duplicate states. It's the largest superset of a 3x3x3 possible.

_________________
Prior to using my real name I posted under the account named bmenrigh.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: mass-produced stickerless supercubes and Super cube theo
PostPosted: Tue Jul 08, 2014 1:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 8:54 pm
Location: Bay Area, California
crypticat wrote:
3) if these pieces are self-placing and/or self-orienting, then these actions are effectively not part of the solution, just as if they had less complex markings that did not describe their position or orientation.

Not all of the pieces place themselves.

Here is [B, F, U, F', B', U'2, B, F, U, F', B', U'2] executed on a few different puzzles.

Rubik's Cube:
Attachment:
center_twist_3x3x3.png
center_twist_3x3x3.png [ 11.72 KiB | Viewed 957 times ]

Rubik's Maze Cube:
Attachment:
center_twist_maze_3x3x3.png
center_twist_maze_3x3x3.png [ 16.31 KiB | Viewed 957 times ]

Magic Octahedron:
Attachment:
center_twist_magic_octahedron.png
center_twist_magic_octahedron.png [ 8.23 KiB | Viewed 957 times ]

Circle 3x3x3:
Attachment:
center_twist_circle_3x3x3.png
center_twist_circle_3x3x3.png [ 15.69 KiB | Viewed 957 times ]


As you can see, those pieces show the orientation of the 3x3x3 face centers.

_________________
Prior to using my real name I posted under the account named bmenrigh.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: mass-produced stickerless supercubes and Super cube theo
PostPosted: Tue Jul 08, 2014 2:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2012 4:06 pm
Brandon Enright wrote:
The term "super" cube comes from the idea of a "superset" -- a set that is greater than or equal to the current set and fully contains the current set.

You can think of every position reachable by a puzzle to be some set of positions. If there is some way to mark the pieces on the puzzle so that you can see more positions then you make the set much larger (it becomes a superset of the original set).

The general use of "super-puzzle" tends to mean the largest set of positions you can make out of the puzzle if you mark every piece uniquely to show position and orientation. This eliminates the duplicate states and makes the distinct reachable positions as large as possible.

okay...i get it now.
the images, also, were a great help. been a while since i've played with the Circle Cube, and apparently i wasn't really paying close enough attention when i did it.

thank you both for your explanations!

:cc:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: mass-produced stickerless supercubes and Super cube theo
PostPosted: Tue Jul 08, 2014 2:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 6:07 am
Location: Germany, Bavaria
crypticat wrote:
...
by 'smaller edge piece', likewise i refer to that piece within the part of the circle that intersects the edge piece of the cube. there are two.
...but we should use the same terminology...what are the proper terms for these pieces?
... 
We used the terms "inner edge" and "circle corner" (CC) in the Crazy 333 Plus solving thread viewtopic.php?t=17134 as in this picture:

Image

A normal Circle Cube (in Dayan terminology = all faces 0) is just (a differently looking and not so well turning :wink: ) Super 333 as it has become clear by now.
We count 26 pieces as Carl has explained above. (8 corners, 12 (outer edges), 6 centres with orientation)

_________________
My collection at: http://sites.google.com/site/twistykon/home


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: mass-produced stickerless supercubes and Super cube theo
PostPosted: Tue Jul 08, 2014 3:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2012 4:06 pm
Konrad wrote:
A normal Circle Cube (in Dayan terminology = all faces 0) is just (a differently looking and not so well turning :wink: ) Super 333 as it has become clear by now.

very clear now, finally!

by the way, is there a different term for a Circle Cube with all faces = 1 (in Dayan notation)?
Superantoniovivaldo suggested it was called a 'Cross Cube', but i've never heard that term applied to a Circle Cube without extensions.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: mass-produced stickerless supercubes and Super cube theo
PostPosted: Tue Jul 08, 2014 4:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 6:07 am
Location: Germany, Bavaria
crypticat wrote:
...
by the way, is there a different term for a Circle Cube with all faces = 1 (in Dayan notation)?
Superantoniovivaldo suggested it was called a 'Cross Cube', but i've never heard that term applied to a Circle Cube without extensions.
An all 1 Dayan 333 Plus is a Rubik's Cube.
A cube with circles that can be turned independently would be a 333 with baby faces = Cross Cube.

_________________
My collection at: http://sites.google.com/site/twistykon/home


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: mass-produced stickerless supercubes and Super cube theo
PostPosted: Tue Jul 08, 2014 4:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2012 4:06 pm
Konrad wrote:
crypticat wrote:
...
by the way, is there a different term for a Circle Cube with all faces = 1 (in Dayan notation)?
Superantoniovivaldo suggested it was called a 'Cross Cube', but i've never heard that term applied to a Circle Cube without extensions.
An all 1 Dayan 333 Plus is a Rubik's Cube.
A cube with circles that can be turned independently would be a 333 with baby faces = Cross Cube.

sorry...i did mean free-turning circles.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: mass-produced stickerless supercubes and Super cube theo
PostPosted: Tue Jul 08, 2014 4:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:09 pm
Location: Missouri
crypticat wrote:
very clear now, finally!
YES!!!! I was starting to feel like I was butting my head against a brick wall there. Thanks for the help with the images guys.

By the way crypticat, don't take the "butting heads" comment as a negative. I enjoy being able to share what I "see" and helping others "see". You should go back a read the thread where Brandon and I were going back and forth on the Complex NxNxN puzzles where N is even. Its a more "complex" (bad pun) picture but boy was it work to get Brandon to see what I saw. It feels great to finally see the eye's open and the other person finally get it.

Thanks for the exchange,
Carl

_________________
-
Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: mass-produced stickerless supercubes and Super cube theo
PostPosted: Tue Jul 08, 2014 4:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 8:54 pm
Location: Bay Area, California
wwwmwww wrote:
You should go back a read the thread where Brandon and I were going back and forth on the Complex NxNxN puzzles where N is even. Its a more "complex" (bad pun) picture but boy was it work to get Brandon to see what I saw. It feels great to finally see the eye's open and the other person finally get it.

I was thinking the same thing :-) I'm very stubborn.

I do like these sorts of conversations though! I was thinking this morning about how different this forum would be without you (Carl) and Andreas. We'd still be in the theoretical stone age if it weren't for you two.

_________________
Prior to using my real name I posted under the account named bmenrigh.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: mass-produced stickerless supercubes and Super cube theo
PostPosted: Tue Jul 08, 2014 8:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2011 3:17 am
Location: Australia
The CrazyB4cubes have created many more face types, so to account for that, I've introduced a new Nomenclature for Naming the various Centre types here: viewtopic.php?f=4&t=25902&start=151

_________________
1st 3x3 solve Oct 2010 (Even though I lived through the 80s).
PB 3x3 55sec Jan 2011 (When I was a kid 1:30 was speedcubing so I'm stoked).
1st 3x3 Earth (nemesis) solve Jan 2011 My You Tube (Now has ALLCrazy 3X3 Planets with Reduction)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: mass-produced stickerless supercubes and Super cube theo
PostPosted: Tue Jul 08, 2014 8:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2012 4:06 pm
wwwmwww wrote:
crypticat wrote:
very clear now, finally!
YES!!!! I was starting to feel like I was butting my head against a brick wall there.
By the way crypticat, don't take the "butting heads" comment as a negative.

:lol: it's okay!
without meaning to, i think i've always been the kind of student who makes teachers reconsider their methods...often with great frustration.
  sometimes my mind just 'sees things' the wrong way, or not at all.
i do appreciate the effort and patience!

:cc:
 


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 48 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

Forum powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group