Nxn rubik's cube - how many orientations?

  • Thread starter Thread starter DyslexicHobo
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Cube
DyslexicHobo
Messages
249
Reaction score
0
I'm sitting here with my new 5x5x5 rubik's cube, and I was just wondering how many possible orientations there were. I THOUGHT:
-Each corner has 3 orientations and 8 positions
-Each middle side has 2 orientations and 12 positions
-Each outer side has 2 orientations and 24 positions
-etc etc for each piece
-multiply each possible position and orientation together

However, I know that certain orientations are not physically possible to achieve. For example, you can't have a solved cube with only one corner with a different orientation. I'm not sure how to exclude these when trying to account for all physically possible orientations.


So my question: what is the total number of different ways a nxnxn rubik's cube can be presented assuming that with normal rotations of a rubik's cube, it can be solved. I tried generalizing it by looking at a 1x1x1 cube and 2x2x2 cube, but I'm still really lost.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
It's a complicated question. I think the answer is http://www.research.att.com/~njas/sequences/A075152 (5) = 282870942277741856536180333107150328293127731985672134721536000000000000000.

(The offset seems to be wrong -- maybe I should email Dr. Sloane on this one!)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yeah, I saw that number when browsing around google. That's an interesting function though. Looks even more difficult for even numbered cubes.

Code:
f := proc(n) local A, B, C, D, E, F, G; 
if n mod 2 = 1 then 
A := (n-1)/2; F := 0; B := 1; C := 1; D := 0; E := (n+1)*(n-3)/4; G := (n-1)*(n-3)/4; 

else A := n/2; F := 1; B := 1; C := 0; D := 0; E := n*(n-2)/4; G := (n-2)^2/4; fi; (2^A*((8!/2)*3^7)^B*((12!/2)*2^11)^C*((4^6)/2)^D*(24!/2)^E)/(24^F*((24^6)/2)^G); 

end;

I don't really understand the syntax, let alone the mathematics behind it, but thanks for the link. I guess it's a more complicated process than I thought.
 
DyslexicHobo said:
I don't really understand the syntax, let alone the mathematics behind it, but thanks for the link. I guess it's a more complicated process than I thought.

Here's a fairly straightforward translation into Pari:
Code:
cube(n)={
	local(A, C, E, F, G);
	A = n >> 1;
	if(n%2,
		F = 0; C = 1; E = (n+1)*(n-3)/4; G = (n-1)*(n-3)/4;
	,
		F = 1; C = 0; E = n*(n-2)/4; G = (n-2)^2/4;
	);
	(2^A*((8!/2)*3^7)*((12!/2)*2^11)^C*(24!/2)^E)/(24^F*((24^6)/2)^G)
}

The first indented block sets up variables for n odd, the second for n even. The final result is the line starting "(2^A".
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top