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

TwistyPuzzles.com Forum
 It is currently Mon Apr 21, 2014 4:42 am

 All times are UTC - 5 hours

 Page 1 of 1 [ 13 posts ]
 Print view Previous topic | Next topic
Author Message
 Post subject: Fisher's Methods & ApplicationsPosted: Fri Apr 05, 2002 11:37 am

Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2001 8:31 am
Location: New York
Take a look at the mini 4x4 mechanism, its in a post a week or 2 back, you could say this uses the same principles fisher used in his cuboids. It looks like a 5x5 that had fisher's ideas applied.

If this works on higher order cubes,
then why not make 5x4x3 or 5x4x4 5x4x2 4x3x2 4x3x3
Its definitely possible, but finding external cubies to fit would be hard. that might require making your own...
Or, we could use mini 5x5 and 4x4 as kernels.
They are more expensive, but easier to work with by size, because then 3x3 cubies would work (i think). But then another problem arises. The mini 4x4 and 5x5 have HOLLOW cubies, whereas meffert's 4x4 5x5 and ideal/arxon 4x4 have Solid cubies. I think 90mm (89mm) giant cube cubies are too large to work with on a 4x4, and definitely on a 5x5.
But, i played around with numbers a little. and a 5x4x4 cube seems possible, with a regular 5x5, and regular 3x3 cubies. In this case, i would use fake 3x3's, just because of the quantity of pieces needed.

The making of the actual mechanism is trial and error. I have experience (2x3x3 mech). Ask Joshua and Wayne as well. And there are others who have done it according to fisher's incomplete mechanism diagram.

Top

 Post subject: A logical ideaPosted: Fri Apr 05, 2002 7:44 pm

Joined: Sun May 27, 2001 7:03 pm
when i read waynes article, i thought it would be pretty commonsensical if you could make wierd variations in size (anything up to 5 on each side). at first thats what i thought chris was up to. but if he can make a 6x6x6 then he must have something different up his sleeve... however, i think it would be a little hard to do, and i imagined from the pictures in the article that the external cubies would eventually have to be quite big??

Top

 Post subject: Im readyPosted: Fri Apr 05, 2002 11:53 pm

Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2001 8:31 am
Location: New York
What should i make from the below list?
5x4x4
5x5x4

I probably wont be able to finish (due to the amt. of
pieces) but it would be nice to try. Should i? or is it just a waste of time if i cant complete it?
v
Will someone tell me how many pieces (externally)
each of the puzzles would need?

Top

 Post subject: You should work it outPosted: Sat Apr 06, 2002 6:31 am

Joined: Sun May 27, 2001 7:03 pm
Its not too difficult to work it out tyler. at some stage im sure you would have to draw a picture of it anyway, so you could think about it then. you would feel more like you did it all by yourself then...

Top

 Post subject: 6 a sidePosted: Sat Apr 06, 2002 7:44 pm

Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2001 8:31 am
Location: New York
I've thought about 6 a side
Its probably possible with fisher's methods. but in this case, you would use SMALLER cubies.

Top

 Post subject: A beautiful challengePosted: Sat Apr 06, 2002 11:53 pm

Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2002 7:27 am
Location: Munich, Germany
I find the idea of 5x4x3, 5x4x4, 5x4x2, 4x3x2 ... cubes simply amazing. I would say that the temptative should be done.
You could start with a quite complete preparation phase. To study the right dimensions, to find the right solution, right materilas and so on.
If I had the time, I would try it.
Good luck Tyler !

Guido

Top

 Post subject: Good luckPosted: Sun Apr 07, 2002 4:02 am
If your going for easiset one i think its the 5x4x4, especialy if you just want to make it and play with/sell it quick, becuase you can make it directly from a 3x2x2, if you want to make it more efficently, ie minimize the number of pieces, it probably wouldn't take that much more work.

The 5x5x4 probably won't be that hard for you either.

Good luck

Top

 Post subject: Re: Good luckPosted: Sun Apr 07, 2002 5:05 am

Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2001 8:31 am
Location: New York
How could i make it quick?

Top

 Post subject: QuickPosted: Sun Apr 07, 2002 5:22 am
Two things firtst is i meant relitively quick, and second is that the was i would use involves a 3x2x2 kernal not a 5x5x5 or a 4x4x4.

rather than spend time designing and makeing new pieces work with ones that are already designed and you have practice making (the 3x2x2), then add to them the new pieces, the problem is that the original pieces, on the inside where they cant be seen, don't really need to be seperate, and it's a bit of a waste to make them that way, but that way you don't have to make a new system.

A warning: this sounds much more complex then it is

As for how you would extend the 3x2x2, the 2x2 sides could be extened in the same was as in the 4x2x2 (if you don't know how this is done it's patented somewhere, and is fairly simple), normaly these peices, the extentions, would fall out out but later pieces will hold them in. Do the same thing with the 3x3x2 sides, obviously it has to be changed a bit, and then the last part is the edges and the corners, which can be added in any way you like, they could be added useing a further modification of the same method, or be done in a way similar to the normal rubiks cube, ie cutdown the outer edges of the interior cubies, and the edges of the (exterior) center ones and then put feet on the edges and corners to fit into this space.

It probably sounds like it would take quite a while, but the modifcations needed are minamal and the designing almost non existant. On the other hand if you wanted to make alot of them it would probably be beter to make it useing a method similar to the 5x5x5 so that no pieces are wasted out of sight.

Top

 Post subject: PlansPosted: Sun Apr 07, 2002 6:31 am

Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2001 8:31 am
Location: New York
i already did some physical testing, no actual cutting or gluing. I have drawn plans (not to scale). maybe ill redraw them in photoshop or vectorworks (CAD program). My sketches are not that great...

Top

 Post subject: What I'm up toPosted: Sun Apr 07, 2002 10:32 pm
At the moment i'm not up to very much, i cant seem to get por a mold to work, and with out that there isn't all that much forward motion i can make, everything is all drawn out, the next step is to make it.

As for fishers cuboids

I think that i should discribe how i look at things first, when i look at a cubic puzzle i see cicles where it turns, all of the pieces move in a circle, and every current puzzle that i own, and as far a i know every on the at exists, can be looked at a a sphere, and every piece is an extention of it. If you want to see this take a part a 3x3x3, the feet make a a sphere.
(Because i cant see your faces i cant tell whether i explained too much or too little, so if it was to little just ask for clarification.)

Fisher's methods do not change this, so every piece still must be conected to the sphere, for this reason they cant be used to make a 6x6x6, nor could they be used to make a 4x4x2, if i made sense before the reason for this should be obvious, every piece moves in a circle, as if it were on a track, and in either the circle moves outside of the cube. For this reason Fisher's methoud can't be used alone to make ever cubiod of lengths less than 5, but can probably used to make most, and with help from other methous can probably make all of them.

My idea doesn't use Fisher's methods, or rather doesn't need to, but they might be a good shortcut, however like i said before i'm having trouble at the moment.

I made my idea when i was trying to figure out how you could make a higher order cube, when i acepted that there was no way that i was going to think of to make the circle the pieces moved in stay inside the cube, i'm not sayint its not possible just thsat i cant do it, i tryed to think of a way to make it so that after the peice was entirily outside the cube it wouldn't fall off, and after a while i found one that was simple, ie not magnets or springs, and for the same reason it will work for cubes it will work for cuboids.

Top

 Post subject: Re: QuickPosted: Mon Apr 08, 2002 5:22 am

Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2001 8:31 am
Location: New York
i dont know how the 4x2x2 works.
But i think what you are saying is do what Udo krell did with the 3x3x3 --> 5x5. I have thought about this way also, and i think it may be easier to use a 5x5x5 kernel.

Top

 Post subject: Re: Fisher's Methods & ApplicationsPosted: Wed Apr 10, 2002 12:41 am

Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2002 1:10 am
First off, good luck!

Second, if you want to know how many cubies on the outside of an AxBxC puzzle, use this:

A*B*C - (A-2)*(B-2)*(C-2)
where A, B & C >= 2

Essentially, the number of cubies it would take to complete this shape out of cubies alone, minus the number that are inside it.

Sandy

Top

 Display posts from previous: All posts1 day7 days2 weeks1 month3 months6 months1 year Sort by AuthorPost timeSubject AscendingDescending
 Page 1 of 1 [ 13 posts ]

 All times are UTC - 5 hours

#### Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

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

Search for:
 Jump to:  Select a forum ------------------ Announcements General Puzzle Topics New Puzzles Puzzle Building and Modding Puzzle Collecting Solving Puzzles Marketplace Non-Twisty Puzzles Site Comments, Suggestions & Questions Content Moderators Off Topic