From cube-lovers-errors@curry.epilogue.com Wed Dec 4 22:36:51 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 WAA16757; Wed, 4 Dec 1996 22:36:50 -0500 Precedence: bulk Errors-To: cube-lovers-errors@curry.epilogue.com Date: Wed, 4 Dec 1996 06:56:55 -0500 From: der Mouse Message-Id: <199612041156.GAA16203@Collatz.McRCIM.McGill.EDU> To: cube-lovers@ai.mit.edu Subject: Re: Rubik's Revenge >> And yes, if you can solve the 3-Cube and the 4-Cube, no higher order >> presents any qualitatively new challenges to a human. > Depends on what you mean by a "challenge." Average puzzlers who > found relatively ordinary algorithms for the 3-cube and 4-cube will > discover that they must find one new algorithm for the 5-cube, but it > will be easy. Are you referring to center-slice non-face-center cubies? If so, well, "duh, I missed that". Dunno why it didn't register on me that the 5-Cube is the first one with such cubies, but it is. I suppose it's just that to me, all eight non-face-center face cubies on the 5-Cube "feel the same", so I didn't notice the difference. (That's also why I think the "new" face cubies on the 6-Cube will not be a challenge. What algorithm _are_ you referring to?) > Consider that the 4-cube (and 5-cube) can be made harder by forcing > the centre (or inner ring) cubies of each face to be oriented. True, of course; putting a picture (or equivalent) on the face of the Cube makes anything above the 2-Cube at least somewhat harder. But AFAICT this doesn't explain your first statement, about needing a new algorithm for the 5-Cube.... der Mouse mouse@rodents.montreal.qc.ca 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B