Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Four-Dimensional Rubik's Cube Craziness

Posted by simoniker on from the my-mind-hurt-enough-solving-the-original dept.

roice writes "Rubik's junkies and puzzlers will be interested in this software rendered four-dimensional analog of Rubik's Cube. With over 1.75E120 possible combinations, it's a mind bender. Free versions are available for both Windows and Linux, and they even publish their source code for download. Solving it will get your name listed in their Hall Of Fame, and there is also a running competition for the most efficient solution. To help get you started, you can check out a solution algorithm based on techniques used to solve the popular three-dimensional version."

28 of 296 comments (clear)

  1. Great. by inertia187 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Heck with solving it. There are some things that just aren't worth solving. Now where can I find a software rendered four dimensional analog of a hammer and nail?

    --
    A programmer is a machine for converting coffee into code.
    1. Re:Great. by YoungFelon · · Score: 5, Funny

      instead of greasing it to make it go faster, you ad space-time fabric softener.

  2. nooo by marvy666 · · Score: 5, Funny

    it took me long enough to finish the real thing.

    1. Re:nooo by Jason1729 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Rubik's makes a special cube for "less intelligent puzzlers". You might want to pick up one of these.

      Jason
      ProfQuotes

  3. Not interested... by rosewood · · Score: 4, Funny

    I can't even figure out the regular one. Hell, I am lucky I can tie my shoelaces in the morning!

    --
    The ultimate network admin tool needs HELP!
    1. Re:Not interested... by ari_j · · Score: 4, Funny

      You sound like you could borrow my Rubik's Square. It only took me about half an hour to solve, once I realized that all the squares are the same color.

  4. Technique number one by RLiegh · · Score: 5, Funny

    Apply a screwdriver to it; reassemble in the proper order.

    Um, though that may be a little hard with the program, I'll admit.

    Maybe if I apply the screwdriver to the ~~++5#Q%NO CARRIER

    1. Re:Technique number one by ewhac · · Score: 4, Funny

      That's a violation of your End-User License Agreement and the DMCA.

      Please lie face down on the ground, with your legs and arms apart. BSA agents will be arriving shortly to take you into custody.

      Schwab

      --
      Editor, A1-AAA AmeriCaptions
  5. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 5, Funny

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  6. damn it.... by deadsaijinx* · · Score: 4, Interesting

    you know how long I've been working on my three dimensional one? over a year. Perhaps I'm stupid, but that thing is impossible to solve. Anyone have any clue how long it would take a computer to solve your standard rubics cube through brute force?

    --
    YOU SUCK BALLS!
    1. Re:damn it.... by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 4, Informative
      you know how long I've been working on my three dimensional one? over a year. Perhaps I'm stupid, but that thing is impossible to solve.

      Maybe somebody subjected you to one of my favorite old tricks. Take one corner off of a solved cube and rotate it so that the colors don't match the rest of the cube. Reassemble in this orientation. Presto: unsolveable cube.

    2. Re:damn it.... by hawkstone · · Score: 4, Funny

      Maybe somebody subjected you to one of my favorite old tricks. Take one corner off of a solved cube and rotate it so that the colors don't match the rest of the cube. Reassemble in this orientation. Presto: unsolveable cube.

      Kinda funny -- I've inadvertently subjected myself to this same trick as a child. It always took so long to scramble the thing, it was easier to take it apart and put it back together in random order. Little did I realize there was a very good chance of creating an unsolvable cube.

      Furthermore, I went so far as to buy a "how to solve the rubik's cube" book. Followed every goddamn step in that thing, and was pissed when it wasn't working. Eventually I tried it on my sibling's and it worked, and I came to the conclusion that mine was defective. Not sure how long it took me to figure out how mine became defective, but the blame was fully mine. :)

      Gotta say, trying to solve an unsolveable puzzle sure kept me busy. It may have gotten my frustration tolerance up high enough that I can stand to debug those really nasty programs....

  7. thats an easy one by becktabs · · Score: 5, Funny

    and there is also a running competition for the most efficient solution.

    duh...just peel off the stickers.

  8. *Four* dimensional Rubiks Cube? by The+Cydonian · · Score: 4, Funny

    What, you have to step into the future to solve it? :-D

    --
    More than mere navel gazing.
  9. Be pepared... by LeiGong · · Score: 5, Funny

    Just a word of warning to the foolish and brave. Before you tackle the 4^4 hypercube, make sure you buy an ergonomic mouse and mousepad. My guess is you'll probably develop super-carpal tunnel syndrome before you even you match one side of the damn cube. Also be sure to stockpile a few extra mouses, there's no knowing how many of them you'll be throwing against the wall.

  10. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 5, Informative

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  11. When I was a kid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I memorized the solutions to the Rubik's Cube so everyone would think I was smart! Haha, fooled them!

    Now I just get drunk and masturbate a lot.

  12. Re:Lego Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Ahhhhhhhh!

    It's LEGO, not LEGO's, not Lego's, not lego's, not lEGO's, not leGO's, not legO's, not lego'S, not LeGo's, not lEgO'S.

    It's not LEGOS, legos, LEGOS'.. ITS LEGO

    "I have one LEGO, I have two LEGO, I have many LEGO. I enjoy playing with LEGO"

    1 LEGO = LEGO
    2 LEGO = STILL LEGO

    No farking S!!

    Ok I feel better now. :)

  13. Is this actualy 4D ? by Forge · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I don't know. It looks like a more complex 3D version that's just real togh to build with plastic.

    Maybe it's because I read some quack's claim that the 4th dimension was time. In which case a 4D rubics cube would solve itself over time or be onsolvable because it rescrambled while you were trying to solve.

    --
    --= Isn't it surprising how badly I spell ?
    1. Re:Is this actualy 4D ? by cascino · · Score: 4, Informative

      Maybe it's because I read some quack's claim that the 4th dimension was time. In which case a 4D rubics cube would solve itself over time or be onsolvable because it rescrambled while you were trying to solve.
      The 4th dimension is whatever you define it as. There's no "true" 4th dimension. Einstein had the idea that time could be treated in a fashion similar to that of the spatial dimensions, and so, in his work, he defined the 4th dimension as the temporal dimension.
      However, for this program's purposes, it's assumed that we're talking about the 4th *spatial* dimension. You can (kinda) visualize it if you think of the progression of first 3 dimensions: a line (1st d) can be rotated 90 degrees to itself to form a square (2nd d) which can be rotated 90 degrees to itself to form a cube (3rd d). The 4th dimension is thus hypothesized as the space defined by a cube rotated 90 degrees to itself.
      (Granted, I'm no mathematician, so if someone has a better understanding, please correct me.)

    2. Re:Is this actualy 4D ? by Jonathan+the+Nerd · · Score: 4, Informative
      If you've ever read the story "And He Build a Crooked House" by Robert Heinlein, it contains a very good description of what a four-dimensional hypercube would look like. Imagine a small cube in the middle, six cubes surrounding it (one on each side, squashed together so that they share faces), and one big cube on the outside. Alternately, imagine two intersecting cubes (one corner of each cube is in the middle of the other cube), where each face of one cube is connected to each face of the other cube by another cube. Confused yet? So am I! Read the story, it's quite interesting.

      This puzzle uses the first model mentioned above, except that you can only see seven cubes at once (the outer cube is hidden so that it won't block the view of the others). If you rotate the model (with Shift-left or Shift-right click), the outer cube comes into view.

      --
      Disclaimer: The opinions expressed are not necessarily my own, as I've not yet had my medication today.
    3. Re:Is this actualy 4D ? by blincoln · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Here's a Java animation that will show you a 2D projection of a 4D hypercube:

      http://dogfeathers.com/java/hyprcube.html

      It's really tough to wrap your head around another spatial dimension. Books like Flatland and Realware make the comparison to a 2D person's world being interrupted by one of us.

      For example, if you were 2D, living on your flat plane, and a 3D person passed an orange through the plane, you would perceive it as a round shape which grew out of nothingness, got bigger and changed shape for awhile, then shrank and disappeared.

      A 3D person could also see into your house, because a 2D person would just build four walls and no ceiling or floor. Similarly, a 4D creature could see through all of us and our buildings, because we only build in three dimensions.

      --
      "...always new atoms but always doing the same dance, remembering what the dance was yesterday." -Richard Feynman
  14. Most efficient solution by anon*127.0.0.1 · · Score: 4, Funny

    1) Click OPTIONS
    2) Click SOLVE

    Two clicks... anyone do better?

    --
    I am NOT a man!
    I am a free number!
    1. Re:Most efficient solution by fidget42 · · Score: 5, Funny
      1) Click OPTIONS
      2) Click SOLVE

      Two clicks... anyone do better?
      Umm..
      3) PROFIT?
      --
      The dogcow says "Moof!"
  15. You were close... by bazmonkey · · Score: 4, Informative

    The best way to solve a given cube is called "God's algorithm" to us Rubik's geeks (I can average about 50 s. solving a cube, which is ok, but not phenomenal). It's 18 moves. The method behind it is far too complicated for a person to do without a computer to assist, but using a rather simple method, a person can very easily solve a cube in around 65 moves, but slowly. The record-breaking solution times are closer to a hundred moves, but rather than remembering a move-efficient but thought-intensive way to solve it, one remembers many more algos that whose situation can be recognized much more quickly.

    And for the previous posts asking how long it takes a computer to do it... it's very, very low. Under a second. Many people can do it, manually (a computer just has to give the moves, it can ignore the time required to actually turn the cube) in under 20 seconds (For the people out there in disbelief, Dan Knights has a video of him actually doing it in 17, it's for real. I won't post the link, because I'm not going to be responsible for slashdotting his site).

    There's a huge difference between a computer solving it "brute force", and a person or computer solving it through established algorithms. By brute force, just twirling the cube until the solution popped up, it would take on average however long it takes your computer to process half of the possible combinations. That's quite a long time. However, a computer solving a cube how we would, focusing on time rather than least amount of moves, could easily solve more than one a second.

  16. Movie References by HeXetic · · Score: 5, Informative

    Puzzled by the cube? Try renting two (relatively low-budget, unknown) sci-fi flicks. - Cube: Buncha people, trapped in a buncha cubes, with a buncha deadly traps. - Cube 2: Hypercube: Buncha people, trapped in a hypercube, with less deadly traps but more confusion as to wtf is going on. Both movies are fairly puzzling in their own right, with that sort of "unknown" sci-fi ending that is commonly found in lower-budgeted movies (e.g. Pi).

    --
    http://www.chmodoplusr.com/
  17. 1-D Rubik's Cube! by pyrote · · Score: 5, Funny

    I found this great 1-D Rubik's Cube, here, I can embed it here on this page:

    .

    The interface is simple: just look at it. Quantum mechnaics dictates that observing it changes it's state so just assume it's solved.

    Here is a magnified version:

    .

    If you still have trouble with it, my book will be coming out pretty soon.

    --
    THE WORLD IS GOING TO END!!!! eventually.
  18. Hofstadter's the best source for rubik weirdness by aziraphale · · Score: 5, Informative

    Douglas Hofstadter wrote a couple of excellent columns on Rubik's cube and variations on the theme for his Metamagical Themas column in Scientific American back in the eighties (you can buy his collected columns in this book). In particular, he talks about the various ways you can modify the basic 3x3x3 cube concept - for example, 4x4x4 cubes, 3x3x3 tetrahedra, alternate colour schemes, and so on (along the way, investigating the spark of inspiration that encourages people to try out different variations on a theme - something he refers to elsewhere in his books as 'conceptual slippage' - this hypercube would be a 'slip' along a different axis to those hofstadter explores - I'm sure he'd appreciate it :) ). He goes into plenty of detail about the mathematical approaches you can use to solving the cube, and some intriguing analogues to subatomic physics that crop up in the maths of rubik... anybody wanting an introduction to the kinds of topics the people behind this hypercube are exploring could do worse than to read those articles.

    There's also some excellent stuff in that book on Lisp, quantum mechanics, chaos theory, Alan Turing, and nuclear war... great selection of articles by an extremely interesting mind.