From cube-lovers-errors@mc.lcs.mit.edu Tue Dec 30 19:54:57 1997 Return-Path: Received: from sun30.aic.nrl.navy.mil by mc.lcs.mit.edu (8.8.1/mc) with SMTP id TAA24798; Tue, 30 Dec 1997 19:54:57 -0500 (EST) Precedence: bulk Errors-To: cube-lovers-errors@mc.lcs.mit.edu Mail-from: From cube-lovers-request@life.ai.mit.edu Mon Dec 29 10:42:38 1997 Date: Mon, 29 Dec 1997 10:27:04 -0500 Message-Id: <00115225.001706@scudder.com> From: jdavenport@scudder.com (Jacob Davenport) Subject: Re: 5x5x5 To: "Cube Lovers" My way of solving the 5x5x5 has been to think about the cube in 3x3x3 terms. When I solve a 3x3x3, I do top corners, bottom corners, top and bottom edges at the same time, and then middle edges. When I do a 5x5x5, I think of the middle corners (those cubies directly diagonal from the center) as corners to the 3x3x3, ignoring completely the outside edges, and I solve them so that all the middle corners are aligned like a 3x3x3 would be aligned. Then I solve the middle edges (those cubies directly next to the center) like I would solve the edges from 3x3x3 cubes. This leaves the nine cubies in the center of each face sovled. I then use a move which many people use when solving a 4x4x4 to get all the edge pieces together without disturbing the center squares. This finally leaves me with messed up corners, solved center squares, and the three edges on each side together. I then view this as a 3x3x3 and solve that using my normal method. The only drawback is that I sometimes cannot get the edges to all work together, and the reason is that I have inadvertantly switched two middle corners, and it takes a long time for me to fix them. If anyone wants more information on this solution, I'll spell it out in detail on my web page. -Jacob Davenport http://wunderland.com/wts/jake