Submitted by
Users who Dugg This
Mr. Baby Man
26695 Followers
Mr. Baby Man
26695 Followers
the Grey Ghost of 2010
990 Followers
the Grey Ghost of 2010
990 Followers
Shelly Cooper
1378 Followers
Shelly Cooper
1378 Followers
ghostof2010Aug 9, 2010
LIES!
mxm111Aug 10, 2010
Indeed, it should be 42. Something wrong with the cube.
labdiscoAug 10, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
calvin84Aug 10, 2010
Thanks for all the fish!
sciguyajAug 9, 2010
Just thinking about these things fills me with rage!
jokr004Aug 10, 2010
They're actually pretty easy to solve once you learn how..
bermudianguyAug 10, 2010
smash it with a hammer , doesn't solve it but it sure relieves the stress.
jkalAug 10, 2010
please hand in your geek badge at the door.
/it does not take brains to solve one, however it does take skill and brains to solve one in record time.
MicealOcorraAug 11, 2010
I just move the stickers.
dibbkdAug 11, 2010
Knowing it can be solved in 20 moves just means it's an infinite number of 20 moves for me. I'll just make it worse with every twist.
jantikAug 9, 2010
Some are easier than others: http://tinyurl.com/6o2pth
taikyokukenAug 10, 2010
That one would be awesome while I was stoned. "Hehe... turn... it's still done. Hehe... it's white... aweshum... I'm hungry."
benmiller313Aug 10, 2010
sounds like a total blast.
wildAug 10, 2010
The argument AGAINST legalization...
(calm down hippies, I'm blazin' right now)
taikyokukenAug 11, 2010
Wow. No sense of humor.
(I'm a smoker myself, and no, I wasn't serious).
xxn3rdc0r3xxAug 11, 2010
Either you've never been stoned before or you're the least fun person to hang out with when you are.
jonprophetAug 10, 2010
Is that the Klu Klux Kube model?
krnballerzzzAug 11, 2010
It's pretty much a normal cube except with white stickers.
Stickers can be found at http://cubesmith.com/Stickers.htm.
starrodkirbyAug 16, 2010
No response pls.
shroomtimeAug 9, 2010
I have a special one that takes hours and hours of rotating and still doesn't solve.
sambono5Aug 9, 2010
Me too :( I guess that's what you get when you buy from the Rubik's Value (TM) range..
coachmcguirkAug 10, 2010
You must have gotten a defective batch.
stupidumbAug 10, 2010
Did you try taking your main finger and turning it topwise?
sufjanstevensAug 10, 2010
did you try removing and replacing the stickers?
lancertAug 10, 2010
You can also pop out each piece and put them back together in their correct location.
I always thought that was a way better solution than twisting and turning the stupid thing.
fluentinsarcasmAug 11, 2010
Sounds like my girlfriend.
jediknight1234Aug 9, 2010
I'm colour blind so it takes me 10 moves :)
BannedOnTheWebAug 9, 2010
LMAO
smacksawAug 10, 2010
I have a hammer so it takes me one move.
cyphaseAug 10, 2010
You have much to learn.
jedikvAug 10, 2010
I would digg you up but I am also colour blind.... :D
bobothekingAug 10, 2010
I only know binary, so it takes me over 10,000 moves.
Closed AccountAug 10, 2010
shouldn't it be 10,100 moves?
belac88Aug 10, 2010
...this guy...
mrautomatic17Aug 11, 2010
that's over 9000
sorry
joshgreenburgAug 11, 2010
no it's under 17.
cucumberboyAug 10, 2010
I'm not very bright so it takes m... Git-r-done!
diggpickAug 10, 2010
My blind friend always solves them in one move.
Closed AccountAug 10, 2010
I think I just felt my bowels move.
Closed AccountAug 9, 2010
I know people who can solve these things in 2 minutes and starting from any position.
stevemtylerAug 9, 2010
they also into DP?
zooltoolAug 10, 2010
That actually takes only about a week or two of practice, if you're serious about learning how to solve it.
Closed AccountAug 10, 2010
2 minutes is nothing. You can learn to do that by memorizing about 20 short sequences. The record is 7.08 seconds.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VzGjbjUPVUo
Closed AccountAug 10, 2010
Or you can solve in 2 or 3 minutes by memorizing 4 short sequences.
Closed AccountAug 10, 2010
Or you can solve it in 2 or 3 minutes by memorizing 4 short sequences (not counting whatever techniques you use to solve the 1st of 3 layers)
stupidumbAug 10, 2010
So at that point, it's all about dexterity and nothing to do with problem solving.
compulsive1Aug 10, 2010
Nice camera work.
mxm111Aug 10, 2010
When I was about 15 and bored, I could consistently solve is in about 45sec, with best times below 30sec. It also depends how lucky you are.
110pctAug 10, 2010
Here is the book that made me The Man, with the nerdy girls...
http://imgur.com/rimhE.jpg
kingp43Aug 10, 2010
lol, I have that book. When I was a young boy, my record - 1:48 ( if i recall correctly, it was 30 yrs ago lol )
warrickneffAug 10, 2010
i like how people that get under a minute or so are very humble :)
asus3000Aug 19, 2010
I recall once solving it in 14 seconds, but it was a fluke.. My best times were usually around 30.. We used to lube them to spin faster.. :)
barrettandersonAug 11, 2010
Yeah, the day I learned to solve one I was doing it in less than 2 minutes. I haven't improved much since then, though... I think I may have cracked a minute one time, but meh.
jtbndyAug 9, 2010
Really, going from a max of 22 moves to 20 is front page worthy? Really?
b3owulfAug 9, 2010
Yes.
iamacyborgAug 10, 2010
You should start a competing website to Digg where instead of aggregating the decisions of thousands of users, they instead look at whatever you want them to. Also, all of your comments would be +1,000 and you could feel good about yourself all the time.
jtbndyAug 10, 2010
My comment was more in reference to a lame news find (in my opinion) being submitted by a power user being made instantly popular.
It's ironic that you talk of aggregating decisions as the onset of power users on Digg has basically done just that. Would this story be made popular if it wasn't submitted by a power user? My guess is no, seeing as it received about 200 diggs within hours of submission and only has 500 after becoming popular.
You might care about the number of diggs your comments get. I don't.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
tomfrostAug 10, 2010
Isn't that where Reddit came from?
smacksawAug 10, 2010
Well I'd have preferred 19 moves, but I'll let it slide. We're feeling forgiving today.
kingbpdAug 10, 2010
Really? Really? Really? Really? Really? Really?
33percentgodAug 10, 2010
Yes Fritz.
radicaldementiaAug 9, 2010
I think it's safe to say that no human will ever be able to consistently solve a cube in 20 moves or less. The algorithms I know require 50-100 moves and memorizing about a couple dozen algorithms. Even the people who can solve the cube in 20 seconds have to do about 40-50 moves really quickly and memorize hundreds of patterns. You can obviously get lucky and solve it in <20 moves (the record is 19), but to do it consistently from any starting position would require memorizing thousands or possibly millions of patterns.
b3owulfAug 9, 2010
Yah, will certainly never be done consistantly. The computers didn't even do it consistantly.
casey3353Aug 10, 2010
I've just had a drunken argument with two girls about there not being proof of this so called 19 move completion.
PLease supply this so that I can show them.
Closed AccountAug 10, 2010
Take a solved cube, move it 19 times, then reverse them.
phoyoAug 11, 2010
Invite me to your next outing and I'll help convince them.
casey3353Aug 11, 2010
Someone remind me not to drink and get on digg.
I regret posting what I said :(
wildAug 10, 2010
You're that guy that always just lifts the box and points at the dead cat, aren't you?
tsuruchibrianAug 10, 2010
Computers will get faster. Computers will one day accomplish in seconds what older computers took decades to compute.
If quantum computing is ever realized, theoretically, all the permutations of rubik's cube configurations could be solved simultaneously.
Supposedly tech savvy people decades ago laughed at the idea of humanity ever having even 1GB of RAM in a consumer computer. Now it is possible to have 24GB last time I checked.
Even if Moores law for computing power is coming to an end for single processors, solving rubik's cubes is a problem that can be solved in parallel. There is already a trend towards more parallel processors. People have predicted that in the next decade consumer CPU's with hundreds of cores will be commonplace.
Will a human mind ever be able to do this? What is a human mind? We know what the answer is today, but I don't think the definition will be so clear in the future. We may be able to supplement our brains with artificial neurons. We are already extremely dependent on computers, but the line dividing the human-machine interface may eventually become blurred.
This may sound like science fiction, and maybe it still is. But if you are a materialist (you don't believe in immaterial souls), there is no reason to think this is not possible.
krnballerzzzAug 11, 2010
Sorry, the fewest moves world record is 22. Right now, with the methods available, it requires hundreds of algs to go under 30 moves (almost) consistently. At the moment, it's pretty much impossible to do "God's algorithm" every single time.
Here is a link to all the Rubik's Cube world records (and some additional puzzles).
http://www.worldcubeassociation.org/results/regions.php
/2008usrubik'scubechampion
barrettandersonAug 11, 2010
I just beat the record with 1 move. Next I'm going to attempt to break my own record with 0 moves.
Closed AccountAug 13, 2010
I can solve it with zero moves. Just get me 6 cans of spray paint and I'll show you.
bustaballsAug 9, 2010
The same team of researchers also found out that no more than 20 Digg submissions go through without at least one being by MrBabyMan.
mrbabymanAug 9, 2010
You bustin' balls?
kingbpdAug 10, 2010
He's Bustin baby balls.
squ1shAug 10, 2010
This is the first time I've ever seen MrBabyMan ever reply to a comment. I'm almost sad that he's human.
princednaAug 10, 2010
He actually does it all the time. Like one of the only Power Users who does it.
But in no way is his comments gonna match up to his submitted total or even popular total any time soon. So his ratio is still way off compared to the average digger.
taikyokukenAug 10, 2010
MrBabyMan, do you just use the search function for your screenname on every story you happen to read? Or do you actually read every comment of every story...
antimrbabymanAug 11, 2010
I am.
b3owulfAug 9, 2010
I remember at some point in my youth I thought, "how hard could it be do solve this with enough CPU time?" 10 minutes later I found that 43,252,003,274,489,856,000 positions number and decided not to waste any time.
johnfluxAug 10, 2010
Not to knock you, but really determining the number of positions as a kid would be very impressive.
You have rotational and reflection symmetries in a cube - 48 in total!
Calculating the number of unique positions is easiest using group theory - calculating the "orbit" of each of the 48 symmetries, then calculating the sum of the orbits, and dividing the total number of combinations by that...
It's fairly standard group theory that you learn doing a degree in math, but a long way away from being intuitive.
b3owulfAug 10, 2010
I certainly didn't do that... I pretty much read the lower bound at the time and calculated how many move combinations there were. I knew there would be a lot of duplicates produced, but the still that number was so large that even if I only needed 1% of them I couldn't have done it.
tbttfoxAug 10, 2010
The number of raw positions on a Rubik's cube is (8! * 3^8 * 12! * 2^12) / (2 * 2 * 3)
8! corner positions
12! edge positions
3^8 corner orientations
2^12 edge orientations
divide by:
2 because of permutation parity
2 because of edge flip parity
3 because of corner orientation parity
Applying Burnside's Lemma, you get 901,083,404,981,813,616 completely unique positions
source: http://www.jaapsch.net/puzzles/theory.htm
Closed AccountAug 9, 2010
This needs to be programmed into Android+Lego's Cube solving robot:
http://www.frequency.com/video/android-lego/178198
root45Aug 11, 2010
Does frequency.com pay you? I'm curious about your incentives.
jimsartorAug 11, 2010
you sir, have just redirected me to the worst website ever made. shame on you.
nightterrorAug 10, 2010
Sure, and they said there would be cake also...
sirjohnmichalotAug 11, 2010
We all know that was a lie
stoanhartAug 10, 2010
Screw Folding, this is a much better use for 50 years of CPU time...
Closed AccountAug 10, 2010
35 years of CPU time is nothing. I have almost that amount dedicated to surfing porn.
taikyokukenAug 10, 2010
This comment doesn't have enough diggs.
anomaly100Aug 10, 2010
I have never solved one. Of course, I give up in 10 minutes, but still.
Closed AccountAug 10, 2010
Leftists sit and wonder what would happen if they had brains. Leftists and Neocons = Filthy Fecal Fiends
smacksawAug 10, 2010
iTroll...poorly
gerrylazloAug 10, 2010
You're doing it wrong.
Closed AccountAug 10, 2010
Wow, anomaly can't go anywhere without teabagger trolls...
sewermuttAug 11, 2010
There's a reason the hardest position for their program begins with "FU-"
adhdocdAug 10, 2010
How about putting those 35 years of cpu time on something like cancer?
iamacyborgAug 10, 2010
How about putting that comment time on something like feeding the destitute?
adhdocdAug 10, 2010
It took me probably 10 seconds to write that, so that really wouldn't be effective now would it jackass?
I'm sure your world has been shattered now knowing that your beloved cube can be solved in 20 moves.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Closed AccountAug 10, 2010
But if you do 6 comments, that's 1 minute. If you do that once a day for a year, that's 365 minutes which is about 6 hours. If you do that for a few years......... it adds up. So instead of contributing to your douch-baggery, contribute to something positive.
smacksawAug 10, 2010
Moron, unsolved Rubik's Cubes are the leading cause of cancer. They're more carcinogenic than cigarettes.
iignotusAug 10, 2010
Wow your username is right adhdocd. What a loser.
uranium118Aug 10, 2010
I doubt researchers would just solve this for fun. The Rubik's Cube can be studied mathematically in abstract algebra, more specifically, group theory.
Here are some link if you're interested.
http://www.math.harvard.edu/%7Ejjchen/docs/Group%20Theory%20and%20the%20Rubik%27s%20Cube.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rubik%27s_cube_group
http://www.usna.edu/Users/math/wdj/rubik_nts.htm
http://www.jaapsch.net/puzzles/theory.htm
gerrylazloAug 10, 2010
Two of my friends died from unsolved rubik's cubes, so f**k you.
iamacyborgAug 10, 2010
Never underestimate the power of brute force.
rockforeverAug 10, 2010
Thats gotta be some kind of oxymoronic statement.
archangelzltAug 10, 2010
Which two words among "power", "brute", and "force" are opposite in meaning?
greengolfballsAug 11, 2010
I can see where rockfever is coming from. Supposing that 'brute' is synonymous with 'power' (which it isn't, but still) the comment is essentially saying: "Never underestimate the power of power power."
pontiacAug 17, 2010
@greengolfballs Still not an oxymoron, if that were the case it'd just be redundant.
snoogsAug 10, 2010
I think he's talking about peeling the stickers off and replacing them all on the correct sides.
awakeningazAug 10, 2010
Nah, he's talking about plugging EVERY SINGLE POSSIBILITY in to the computer to process.
drewmqnAug 11, 2010
I just heard that in Obi Wan's voice.
simplesimpleAug 11, 2010
Strange, I read it in Vader's voice.
leland1Aug 10, 2010
the impatient method of solving Rubik's Cube:
http://james.wdfiles.com/local--resized-images/images:rubiks-cube/green-red-yellow.jpg/medium.jpg
revovisionaryAug 10, 2010
I'm glad that we are getting results from idol computer time.
Closed AccountAug 10, 2010
s**t's famous, yo!
wesleyaAug 10, 2010
Just think what could be accomplished with 35 years of idol CPU time. What a complete waste of time. Does anyone still find Rubik's Cube that interesting or am I just weird.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
needcoffeeAug 10, 2010
Mixed digg, agree for me it is a waste of resources, but at the same time I do find RC's still fun an interesting.
uranium118Aug 10, 2010
I doubt researchers would just solve this for fun. The Rubik's Cube can be studied mathematically in abstract algebra, more specifically, group theory.
Here are some link if you're interested.
http://www.math.harvard.edu/~jjchen/docs/Group%20Theory%20and%20the%20Rubik%27s%20Cube.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rubik%27s_cube_group
http://www.usna.edu/Users/math/wdj/rubik_nts.htm
http://www.jaapsch.net/puzzles/theory.htm
Closed AccountAug 10, 2010
It takes me 0 moves to solve one...All i do is get a screw driver, disassemble the cube, then reassemble the cube with the right colors
...am I the only one who takes this approach?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
bahman2000Aug 10, 2010
i just take off the stickers and reapply them correctly
Closed AccountAug 10, 2010
I don't use the cheap sticker ones...I prefer the ones with painted blocks
rudegarAug 10, 2010
so reaching for the screw driver is not one of your moves ? :P
mweatherAug 10, 2010
I prefer the painted ones too. That's why I remove the stickers and paint each side a different color. Saves time on solving it, too.
orangetideAug 10, 2010
removing a sticker is a move, so you're looking at about 54 moves.
ndelangenAug 10, 2010
53,
because1 is already in the right place :D
orangetideAug 10, 2010
well generally there are 6 you don't have to move in the center of each face.
plus there are 8 others per face but only 6 faces so there are at least 2 per face you don't need to move. so I think 36 moves if you are removing stickers.
Closed AccountAug 10, 2010
Define 1 move first. Is that a single tile switch, or is spinning on the same axis until you stop 1 move?
tragedyfishAug 10, 2010
One move is one 90° rotation of any side.
rudegarAug 10, 2010
first we take the cube then we take the spin offs
http://www.techdigest.tv/rubikcubespinoffs.jpg
be afraid be very afraid
bartledooAug 10, 2010
I saw some 8x8x8 Rubik's cubes in Hungary. They scared me badly.
zooltoolAug 10, 2010
Actually, once you get above 5x5x5 it's really only additional time required to solve them. I own a 7x7x7 and it takes roughly an hour for me to solve.
krnballerzzzAug 11, 2010
With the exception of the 5x5x5 fusion on the top left, about half of them are much easier to solve than the Rubik's Cube. Their odd shapes and turning mechanisms restrict the number of moves they can make, which in turn makes the puzzle have less positions.
mizuhochanAug 10, 2010
My rubik's cube has stickers, so it takes me 1 move.
libertarianslolAug 10, 2010
this is bigger news than P != NP
lukas1051Aug 10, 2010
P != NP could change the world... This is just an answer to a question no-one really needs to know.
fr0stbyte124Aug 10, 2010
Everyone already knew P != NP. It was just a bunch of assh**e mathematicians going "Yeah, but can you prove it?"
glbernsAug 10, 2010
The question "Yeah, but can you prove it?" is pretty much the basis for science and math.
krnballerzzzAug 11, 2010
@glberns
Yea, but can you prove it?
iceman21Aug 10, 2010
I've solved one of these things before, anyway i don't think the point of having a rubiks cube is to memorize a pattern so that you can solve the thing in x number of rotations from any point, the rubiks cube is a timesink for bored people.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
gerrylazloAug 10, 2010
Actually the number of moves changes depending on the state of the cube. Anyone solving it under 2 minutes will tell you sometimes you get lucky and sometimes you get screwed. It's almost never the same number of moves from one mix to the next.
needcoffeeAug 10, 2010
I might have my math wrong, but how was it possible given the number of permutations possible.
(54 !) / ((9 !) * (9 !) * (9 !) * (9 !) * (9 !) * (9 !)) = 1.01097362 × 10^38 possible variationsComment is buried, click here to see the rest.
cyclonusripAug 10, 2010
If you read the article they tell you how they reduced the problem down. Using symmetry you can reduce it by a factor of 48. Then you can further reduce that by combining problems where the entire solution for one cube is a subset of a larger solution sequence. Like say you solve one cube in 13 moves then you know you can solve every cube 1 move away from that in no more than 14 moves and then every cube 1 move from the 14 sequence in 15 moves. Using that they reduce the problem significantly.
needcoffeeAug 10, 2010
Kinda like a chess egtb
poochyfudAug 10, 2010
The Rubiks cube is a symmetry group. Not every possible sticker configuration is possible given the moves.
tbttfoxAug 10, 2010
The number of raw positions on a Rubik's cube is (8! * 3^8 * 12! * 2^12) / (2 * 2 * 3) = a little more than 43 quintillion
If you take apart a Rubik's cube, there aren't 54 colored squares, there are 20 individual little cubies and the central kernel that make up the whole thing.
Those 20 cubies have 2 types. 8 corner cubies that have 3 colors on them, and 12 edge cubies that have 2 colors on them. There are also 6 centers that are connected to the core that we can basically ignore other than as a reference because they never get out of order. So look up at the equation and see the 8, 3, 12, and 2 in the first part. The second part is just because the cube can have 'even' and 'odd' states. And because turning a face is an even state, you can ignore all the odd states. It's like if you add any 2 even numbers, you always get an even number.
hardwalkerAug 10, 2010
cause there's only like 5 patterns you gotta learn
mcfriendlyAug 10, 2010
How To Solve A Rubik's Cube Easily? My son did it without any moves - he took off all the paper color squares and pasted them on the correct sides :)Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
neutron7Aug 10, 2010
Wow they really did have too much "time" on their hands.
gfoderaAug 10, 2010
Tell us Derwin, what the f**k else should math professors be setting aside "time" for?
huggsandkissesAug 10, 2010
It's easy to solve if you hurl it against a wall after 2 minutes of frustration, then just glue all the pieces back together.... :)
unbannedaccountAug 10, 2010
Good thing we aren't using those resources for curing cancer or AIDS. Need to do what is important.
fr0stbyte124Aug 10, 2010
AIDS is harder to solve than rubiks cubes. If it was just a matter of crunching numbers you can believe people would be doing that.
gfoderaAug 10, 2010
Good thing we aren't bitching about trivial gaming math equations and actually drawing feeble comparisons to finding a cure for AIDS and cancer...oh wait never mind.
unbannedaccountAug 11, 2010
Good thing, we aren't being a bigger douche, with a bigger douchey opinion when we could have just moved on to something else that actually mattered.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
gfoderaAug 11, 2010
Good thing we aren't calling ourselves a douche and then claiming it doesn't matter...by posting another comment about it...ah s**t wait, never mind again.
pplantAug 10, 2010
Even though I have a math minor I have been plagued by this trend of authors that just pisses me off.
He spends two paragraphs talking at length about mirror and symmetric shortcuts, which is relatively easy comprehension (in essence they didn't solve for similar problems oriented in a left handed vs right handed problems which are the same problem oriented in a different way). THEN just decided to introduce 'H' for the f**k of it.
Tell me someone, anyone - what the f**k is 'H'?
goodthinkinAug 10, 2010
This thread is giving me a headache.
gregdogumAug 10, 2010
I feel like an uber nerd after reading that. COOL!
zooltoolAug 10, 2010
Now solve the minimum number of moves for this thing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtKBAofrfo8
Closed AccountAug 10, 2010
42.
glbernsAug 10, 2010
http://www.nooooooooooooooo.com/
zooltoolAug 10, 2010
Actually, he did. It took him approximately 16 hours over the course of 4 days.
Closed AccountAug 11, 2010
Well now.....that's just silly.....
diggerlaterAug 10, 2010
Unless you take a corner piece out, rotate, and then replace it.
m4rauderAug 10, 2010
There are 43 Quintillion possible positions for Rubik's Cube. If you had a single cube for every possible position...
... they could fill the earth's volume 208 times.
... lining them single file would stretch 262 light-years.
xraymasterAug 10, 2010
You must be cool to hang out with.
sylphid15Aug 11, 2010
I lol'd
m4rauderAug 11, 2010
There's more where that came from...
avsfan1Aug 10, 2010
Not when I'm solving it!
giveerAug 10, 2010
I had a "cube solve" book back in the 80s that declared every cubed could be solved in roughly 23 moves or less but could only be proven in mathematical calculations because no human on earth had actually done it yet. 25 years later, they've knocked off 3 moves and I suppose still no one has done it yet. - Although I gather that 7.03 second record guy came close.
thesprunkAug 10, 2010
35 idle CPU years?
That's what, 5 seconds?
diggimatorAug 10, 2010
The number is not 42? Heresy!
nighthawkcaAug 11, 2010
Eddies in the space-time continuum!
And why is that ottoman floating?
Closed AccountAug 11, 2010
But how long does it take to solve Alexander's Star?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander%27s_Star
phoyoAug 11, 2010
I bought a Rubik's cube recently to relive my childhood, and was extremely disappointed to find out that they now include instructions on how to solve it! Blasphemy! Kids these days have no patience...
slapdedAug 11, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
jstrahnAug 11, 2010
I thought my older sister was a genius because she could solve a Rubik's Cube in like 5 minutes no matter what position it was in. Then I realized she was removing the stickers and sticking them back on. Christ I was gullible. :(
arkveldAug 11, 2010
I have a friend who made bets in school that he could solve a rubik's cube in 2 minutes, with everyone watching him to make sure he didn't do what you mentioned.
I don't think he failed to do it once. (this was like grade 6-7, or about 11-12 years old)
boner79Aug 11, 2010
Every Rubik's Cube can be solved by peeling off and reattaching the stickers.
grubAug 11, 2010
thats still up to 36 moves
lunarparcelAug 11, 2010
Long time solver, though not a speed cuber, and I'm satisfied with that. If I was more ambitious or truly devoid of productive goals I could have probably spent eons of time trying to best myself or others at every turn, but I pretty much figured out by 1983 that I was NEVER EVER going to be in a situation in which my deft cubing skills would be called upon to save the world from imminent destruction.
I guess maybe the coolest thing I ever saw in the world of cube solvery was some magician dude who swallowed a mixed up cube and solved it in his stomach before retching it back out of his mouth. I tried it once..... ONCE ! (but with the smaller keychain version) I couldn't heave it back up though so it just hurt really bad..especially about 2 days later...when I crapped it out.......UNSOLVED ! Turns out I wasn't magic.
xfi6Aug 20, 2010
Baby's first troll
lunarparcelAug 20, 2010
You'll get better with practice.
trevorpaceAug 11, 2010
I tried to make a program to solve this in pretty much the exact same way...I stopped when I figured out it would take my computer about 100 years.
krandenAug 12, 2010
Some people have waaaaaaaaaaaay too much free time.
julian88888888Aug 12, 2010
computers evidently have a lot more.
freetalkliveAug 20, 2010
Can these Google computers calculate a cure for cancer?