MagicCube5D: A Challenge for Only 3 People

  • Thread starter Thread starter scott1
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Challenge
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the challenges posed by a theoretical 5D Rubik's cube, referred to as the MagicCube5D. Participants express their experiences and frustrations with solving various dimensions of Rubik's cubes, including the original 3x3, 4x4, and 5x5 versions, while speculating on the implications of a 5D cube.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express disbelief at the existence of a 5D cube and the difficulty of solving it, with one noting that only three people have solved it so far.
  • One participant critiques the visualization method of embedding a 5D cube into 3D and projecting it onto a 2D screen, suggesting the need for a 5D screen directly connected to the visual cortex.
  • Several participants share their struggles with the original Rubik's cube and its variants, with one stating that they have a book on solving it but still find it time-consuming.
  • Another participant mentions having attempted to follow online instructions for solving cubes but often gives up due to the complexity.
  • There is a claim about someone having solved a 20x20x20 cube, with a link provided to a video proof of this achievement.
  • One participant discusses the similarities in solving larger cubes, suggesting that once a person can solve a 3x3 and a 4x4, the techniques can be applied to larger cubes with some optimizations.
  • Another participant shares their experience with a 4D cube, noting they could solve it by only turning the center pieces, contrasting this with their struggles with the 5D cube.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally express a shared sense of difficulty regarding the 5D cube and the original Rubik's cube, but there is no consensus on the feasibility or methods for solving the 5D cube. Multiple competing views on the challenges of various cube dimensions remain present.

Contextual Notes

Some participants reference specific techniques and tools for solving Rubik's cubes, but there are limitations in the discussion regarding the assumptions made about the capabilities of solving higher-dimensional cubes and the availability of physical cubes.

Physics news on Phys.org
I can't even read it. The stupid part is that they're trying to embed the visulaization into 3D, then project it onto a 2D screen. :confused: What we need is a 5D screen, perhaps wired directly to the visual cortex (I think that's what it's called).
 
Are you out of your ****ing mind?! I can't even do the original.
 
Danger said:
Are you out of your ****ing mind?! I can't even do the original.
It did say only 3 people solved it.
 
Danger said:
Are you out of your ****ing mind?! I can't even do the original.

You've never solved the original rubik's cube?? You better get to work.:approve:
 
and I though Rubiks revenge (4x4x4) or the professor's cube (5x5x5) were tought enough.

rubik01.jpg
 
Last edited:
Omega_6 said:
You've never solved the original rubik's cube?? You better get to work.:approve:
I've got a damned book that shows me how, and it still takes 15 minutes.
 
lol, I've tried following web instructions to solving it...get about halfway done and screw/give up due to it being too hard!
 
Can you believe it, on the web there was someone who solved a
20*20*20 (with video proof)!
 
  • #10
arunbg said:
Can you believe it, on the web there was someone who solved a 20*20*20 (with video proof)!

Link to the page with the video:

http://www.speedcubing.com/chris

Very time consuming. Actually once you can do a 3x3x3 and a 4x4x4, there are no more moves to learn to solve rubik cubes, although there are some optional optimizations. The only "new" squares on the 5x5x5 are the just off center squares that are vertical and horizontal to the center square, but you can use the same moves on these as the center squares on the 4x4x4, which are the just off center corner squares on the 5x5x5. After this, there are no more "new squares", everything is pretty much independent of each other so it's like solving 3x3x3 and 4x4x4 squares in parallel.

There are a few programs out there now that let you work with virtual n x n x n cubes. I got one years ago call wrubik for Windows 3.1. The newer programs can solve as well as let you try out various sized virtual cubes.

There was a short period of time when they re-started making new 3x3x3 Rubik's cubes, so there's a few of these still around, but you'll have to good search to find a 4x4x4 Rubik's revenge, and I don't know if there are any 5x5x5 Professor's Cubes left. The 5x5x5 cubes were awkward to turn and the orange stickers kept coming off (I re-glued them with better glue to fix this). Usually the places that sell the larger cubes are asking people for broken ones to create fixed ones from (the center squares on the 4x4x4 broke easily).
 
Last edited:
  • #11
Yeah... I messed with the 4d cube before, and I was able to solve it as long as I only turned it with the center pieces. I solved the 2x2 3x3 4x4 and 5x5 all faster then anyone in my school... and yet this cube... holy ****.
 

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
33K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
  • · Replies 93 ·
4
Replies
93
Views
16K
  • · Replies 66 ·
3
Replies
66
Views
8K
  • · Replies 98 ·
4
Replies
98
Views
15K
  • · Replies 93 ·
4
Replies
93
Views
12K
  • · Replies 86 ·
3
Replies
86
Views
14K
  • · Replies 156 ·
6
Replies
156
Views
21K
  • · Replies 102 ·
4
Replies
102
Views
11K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
11K