Comments on: Rubik's Cube Puzzle

Rubik's Cube Puzzle

Smaaz — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 03:52:06 -0800

Already solved the Rubik's Cube? Try to solve a rubik's cube mosaic puzzle then!

By: twoleftfeet

twoleftfeet — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 04:43:12 -0800

There's a cube version??? Damn, I just finished the square.

By: le morte de bea arthur

le morte de bea arthur — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 06:22:04 -0800

There's a square version??? Damn, I just finished the line.

By: East Manitoba Regional Junior Kabaddi Champion '94

East Manitoba Regional Junior Kabaddi Champion '94 — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 06:33:00 -0800

There's a square version??? Damn, I just finished the point.

By: East Manitoba Regional Junior Kabaddi Champion '94

East Manitoba Regional Junior Kabaddi Champion '94 — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 06:33:21 -0800

sorry guys

By: Don't_deceive_with_belief

Don't_deceive_with_belief — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 06:46:05 -0800

Actually that looks quite do-able if you understand the concepts of solving the 3x3x3 cube and can do substitutions, but tedious looking at how many cubes are involved. I found the Sodoku Cube to be challenging and very frustrating, a really good mix of logic puzzle and spacial relationships. Anyone know if the 3x3x3 concepts translate to other variants like the 4x4x4 or 7x7x7 cubes? I have never tried these larger cubes for fear of my last shreads of cool and street cred evaporating completely, or maybe that already happened when I replied to this post.

By: mannequito

mannequito — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 07:06:59 -0800

Street cred goes when you sign up here. On the plus side, you can now boast of Mefi Cred, or Credifilter if you prefer.

By: fearfulsymmetry

fearfulsymmetry — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 07:18:34 -0800

Frequently Bought Together: Sudoku 3D Puzzle Cube by LIZARD PRICE Original Rubik's Cube by Drumond Park Mamma Mia! [DVD] [2008] DVD ~ Meryl Streep ...what?!

By: odinsdream

odinsdream — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 07:32:31 -0800

The "solved" link is absolutely not what I'd recommend. It involves learning too many special "and then you just do these 13 steps!" type moves. I recently learned Lars Petrus' method which is actually surprisingly easy and memorable. Don't let the site scare you away, though. He goes into great specific detail on the optimal methods for each of his steps, which is entirely unnecessary to actually using his method. When working through his steps, you can feel free to spend as much time as necessary to reach the end goal of each step through whatever methods you can. To use this method you really only need to memorize three very short, very memorable (in the sense that they have a definite flow that's lacking in the layer-by-layer method) moves, and the seven-step outline. You can easily get to the point of solving cubes in 2-4 minutes with no special skills. I was able to begin solving cubes with no references within a week.

By: DU

DU — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 08:45:04 -0800

Actually that looks quite do-able if you understand the concepts of solving the 3x3x3 cube and can do substitutions Solving the 3x3x3 is a sufficient but non-necessary condition to making the mosaic. You just need to solve a side (not even a layer). Anyone could do this. Now if you mounted the mosaic on a glass table and viewed it from beneath to get another (or the same) picture, THAT would be hard(er).

By: Nelson

Nelson — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 08:53:10 -0800

Why link to dsgnworld which picked it up off of the Make blog which picked it up off a real person's website? Here is the original source, and seems like it's just a silly joke. But it's actually more interesting than that, since the silly joke was stolen without attribution. That picture is actually the RubikCubism work of Parisian street artist Space Invader. He had a show at the SixSpace gallery in LA of it. A bit more on this video interview.

By: DU

DU — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 09:02:31 -0800

Some potentially NSFW there in the RubikCubism link.

By: Don't_deceive_with_belief

Don't_deceive_with_belief — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 09:11:26 -0800

Now if you mounted the mosaic on a glass table and viewed it from beneath to get another (or the same) picture, THAT would be hard(er). I had the same thought, as doing a two sided picture would require a specific solve and mean you couldnt just chance it. As a child I had a puzzle like that, it had two different solves, a picture on each side of the finished puzzle. I think between me and my siblings we managed to finish it. Would it be possible to have 6 different pictures by rotating each cube once to the right / left, up / down or flipped from the original solve? That would be REALLY impressive...

By: Acey

Acey — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 09:22:36 -0800

The Teraminx.

By: Fuzzy Monster

Fuzzy Monster — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 09:29:45 -0800

No matter how hard I try, I can never solve Rubik The Amazing Cube.

By: Rubbstone

Rubbstone — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 14:55:49 -0800

Where is the robot for me to buy so I can pay it to do this on a weekly basis?

By: Suparnova

Suparnova — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 19:59:31 -0800

Right here.

By: fantabulous timewaster

fantabulous timewaster — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 20:09:43 -0800

Awesome. It'd almost certainly take a robot solver, but I'd like to see a one-cube-thick mosaic with different images on the front and back.

By: Eideteker

Eideteker — Tue, 10 Mar 2009 08:38:13 -0800

"There's a square version??? Damn, I just finished the point." Huh, I must've missed that one.