From cube-lovers-errors@curry.epilogue.com Fri May 31 02:24:27 1996 Return-Path: cube-lovers-errors@curry.epilogue.com Received: from curry.epilogue.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by curry.epilogue.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id CAA06383 for ; Fri, 31 May 1996 02:24:26 -0400 Precedence: bulk Errors-To: cube-lovers-errors@curry.epilogue.com Message-Id: <9605310001.AA29475@SSD.intel.com> Cc: cube-lovers@ai.mit.edu Subject: realizing 7x7x7 or larger cubes In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 30 May 96 15:23:58 EDT." <199605301923.PAA18428@Collatz.McRCIM.McGill.EDU> Date: Thu, 30 May 96 17:00:59 -0700 From: Scott Huddleston >In my opinion mechanical designs for the 7 and above will have to be >fundamentally different from those for the 6 and below, because that's >the point at which the "buried" corner of a corner cubie extends past >the surface of the face during a face turn and thus it's not possible >to build the thing as rigid pieces connected to a central mechanism, at >least not without cutting away part of some face-center cubies. One solution to this dilemma is to let some of the "cubies" become "brickies" (i.e., rectangular bricks instead of cubes). In this approach, there's no limit in principle on N to how large an NxNxN puzzle you could build with the standard mechanism. There is, of course, the lower limit you just described to how small the corner cubies could become.