Slashdot Mirror
A Working 5D Rubik's Cube
Melinda Green writes "Readers who enjoyed the previous
Slashdot postings regarding the 4-dimensional Rubik's cube called MagicCube4D will
be interested to know that a couple of brilliant developers have
recently created a working 5-dimensional Rubik's
cube. Operating a 5 dimensional puzzle projected all the way down
to a 2D computer screen may seem a hopeless task but the full 5D puzzle
has already been solved
by 3 people. Also noteworthy is the fact that the 4D puzzle has now
been ported to Java and is available as both a full-featured desktop
application and as an Applet."
n/t
...it requires .NET. Thanks. I don't mind downloading and installing 30MB's of framework just to play with a Rubik's cube. Really, I don't.
after seeing the picture on the front page.. Given that i probably will be dead within the next 100 years i doubt i'll have time to finish it anyways, it's just to many dimensions..
Anyone know where you can buy a real 5D cube? I hate trying to solve them on a computer screen. Much easier in real life.
Also I will need a spare set of 4 dimensional stickers in case the original ones fall off.
I'll probably be modded down for this...
...peel off the stickers in 5 dimensions?
I remember having recieved a rubic cube as a gift many years back. It took up a lot of my time in solving the cube. Heck the cube was so popular that there were entire books written detailing how to solve the cube. And the least time in which I could solve the cube was 20 minutes. Now a five dimentional rubic cube (albeit a software one) - that could be a real challenge even for rubic cube champions themselves. Too bad the software require microsoft dot net framework to run.
Linux Help
for all things on Linux
And the least time in which I could solve the cube was 20 minutes.
o n.html
Using a few simple, easy-to-learn algorithms, and with a few weeks practice it is possible for pretty much anyone to solve the 3D cube in just 2 or 3 minutes. Using a layer-by-layer method you can solve each piece one at a time in the first two layers, then learn 4 algorithms to fix the last layer (not necessarily in this order):
1) Rotate edges
2) Rotate corners
3) Permute corners
4) Permute edges
Sometimes you will have to use an algorithm twice. Each algorithm takes about 10 moves, and at a slow speed of one move per second and a bit of luck you can solve the last layer in under a minute. Here's a beginner's guide:
http://peter.stillhq.com/jasmine/rubikscubesoluti
If you want to get faster you need to learn more algorithms so that you can complete two steps at once.
A popular method which can be used to get very fast times is the Fridrich method, but it requires a lot of memorisation and lots and lots of practice:
http://www.ws.binghamton.edu/fridrich/cube.html
Personally I managed to get times of under 1 minute by practising the cube every day in the bus to and from work.
I'll probably be modded down for this...
Neeeeeeeeeeeeeeerd!!!!
... And don't get me started on the five diementional one...
Damn... And I thought I was hopelessly nerdy.
I must look positively herculean next to these guys.
I remember spending the better part of an afternoon last summer trying to solve my girlfriend's father's 20 year old rubiks cube.
I was really close to solving it when it litterally fell apart in my hands. Turns out one of the (now grown up) kids had once tried to forcibly solve it with a screwdriver. Now, whenever you it get into a certain configuration (ie: a near-finished state) it loses all structural integrity.
I could have cried... I WAS SO CLOSE!!!
I was crazy to spend so long on a three diementional rubik's cube.
But, I don't know which is crazier... That someone made a four diementional version, or that people have already solved it.
So, if a 5D cube was created, it would prove that we live in a matrix?
If I remember my 4th grade physics correctly, the 5th dimension is a tesseract. I fully intend to use this "cube" to teleport around the universe!!! muhahahhhahaa
Nooo.... it's because we don't live in 5 dimensional space that a 5D rubic's cube sounds impossible.
Technoli
That 4d java applet is amazing! It even runs perfectly fast on my Pentium II.
"linux is just DOS with a UNIX like syntax" -- Galactic Dominator (944134)
Is there anyone reading with the brains/training to confidently/accurately answer some questions please?
"These are Rubik's cubes of the form 3d, with the original popular puzzle being 33. We label the puzzles like this because they are a d-dimensional cube broken into 3d smaller pieces or "cubies" of the same dimension. For example, the 3D cube has 33 or 27 total 3-dimensional cubies."
Does adding cubies really mean adding a dimension, or does it mean simply making a more complicated 3D puzzle and giving it a fancy name? (Behold: the Fifth Dimension! Amaze Your Friends!)
I noticed in the 4D model that elements disappear and reappear with each move. What's up with that? What do the green cubes represent? Where are the pieces which disappear supposed to be going, and why can't we see the changes being made to this set of cubies? Is the invisible set a cheat on the part of the designers?
I have not played with the 5D version, and so have no questions about that one.
RTFM; please, I beg you.
The title is misleading, it the cube isn't written in ruby.
If the three dimensions are length, width, heighth, and the fourth is time -- how do you accurately depict that? What is the 5th dimension? How can these be anything more than an extended 3D object? I know someone out there knows what's going on, please fill me in?
War isn't about who's right. It's about who's left.
If you exist in one dimension, is the 2nd dimension neccessarilry width, or is it height? There are many other choices, but we tend to pick time because it is easily understood by us.
..........FULL STOP.
Just wait until GCC makes a native .NET port that compiles them to standalone executables. Mono exists, but I don't know if that compiles to native assembly or MSIL.
'Yes, firefox is indeed greater than women. Can women block pops up for you? No. Can Firefox show you naked women? Yes.'
5-dimensional Rubik's Cube is word evil.
Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
the applet uses both left, right, and control clicks, which means people browsing the web via mac get the shaft too
VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
Microsoft builts its software with Win32...they do not want to use layers upon layers of object and class hierrararchies, because their apps will be slow as hell...especially MSWord that's already slow in Win32.
Both of these guys who wrote this are my co-workers at my day job. They're both really brilliant guys. IIRC Roice has actually solved a 3D cube behind his back before...
Cryptic Allusion - New Mac and Dreamcast Games!
Oh my god, you're right! It does look like he wrote this application in .NET solely for the purpose of being a huge burden on everyone! After thinking about it, I guess it really does have nothing to do with .NET probably being the language he's most familiar with. I'm sure that he probably did want to spend several months learning a new language for something that could best be described as an amusing diversion, but chose not to because he wanted to waste the few minutes it would take you to download and install .NET. Come to think of it, I'm sure the fact that most people already have .NET installed probably just makes him mad, because it mitigates the toll his application will take on society.
The fact that it's kind of cool is only a ruse in his more diabolical agenda of making your life miserable for five or so minutes. The fact that we are compelled to install it by means I don't quite understand yet only makes the situation worse. If only we had a choice whether or not we wanted to play with a 5-dimensional Rubik's Cube!
Personally, I think that if you're as outraged as I am, since you're obviously so much smarter then me, you should rewrite his application in a morally superior language. The kink in this fool's plan is that he seems to have forgotten to patent the application (but be careful, it could be another trick!), which leaves the door open for anyone to simply rewrite it!
Please start working on it right away, as this outrage must not go unanswered!
Why must people always strive to make things more complicated. I say someone should design and implement a 2D Rubik Cube. Personally, I'd find that far more fun.
So I guess it really IS the dawning of the age of aquarius!
What I'd like to know is how would a 2D version of the Rubik "cube" look like. A square with each side made up of three different segments, and each segment swaps with the opposite one? Somehow that doesn't seem right...
i ate crayons when i was a kid and now i have two braincells and the blue ones taste nicer
But how do you know we don't live in the Matrix?
Why is it that when you believe something it's an opinion, but when I believe something it's a manifesto?
There is no cube.
When you realise this, you will see that it is not the cube that gets solved. It is only yourself.
Is on slashdot trying to *learn* cool things about tech and its many uses - trolling uber733t *nix snobs like you is just a fringe benefit!
Take the 90-Day Challenge! http://rwmurker.bodybyvi.com/
This 5D cube is *so* dated.
:]
I'm waiting for the 6D version
I think the solve option is very good, its just mind blowing, would be nice to see this as a screen saver :D
5DStuff.COM
Anyway - it is actually an interesting piece of work. The original cube itself is also very nice. One must recognize that even the original cube does actually contain more than one solution. If you replace the stickers on an original cube with 6 different images then you will reduce the number of solutions to one single. The catch is that the center piece can on an original cube have four different positions that all are correct. This means that the original cube in theory actually has 4096 different solutions.
One variation on the 3D cube that I have been considering is actually doing a 5x5x5 cube instead. It is a mechanical challenge since it requires better precision to avoid falling apart.
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
I think you've been had. I have a 5x5 that I bought at the local game store, and there were more than 5 there on the shelf. It's called a Rubik's Professor. It's actually not that tricky to solve, just time-consuming. I can do a 3x3 in a couple of minutes, a 4x4 in half an hour, and a 5x5 in a couple of hours.
Thought you might be interested to know... MagicCube4D supports 2x2x2x2, 3x3x3x3, 4x4x4x4, and 5x5x5x5 puzzles. MagicCube5D supports 2x2x2x2x2, 3x3x3x3x3, 4x4x4x4x4, and 5x5x5x5x5 puzzles. You can buy a 5x5x5 Professor's cube from www.mefferts.com.
Who, out of those of you that have it, are willing to start a torrent for the rest of us?
Sorry, but you don't actually have a unique rarity on your hands. 5x5x5 Rubik's Cube's can be bought for about $30 in any good toy store. If you like ordering online, they're available direct from the manufacturer along with all the other versions. Also, that simulator you requested has already been written. There is a general Rubik's cube simulator available here which can simulate a cube of any size.
As to being too difficult to solve, the world record for solving one of these is 1:47.22 (that's less than two minutes). You can check out lots of records on this speedcubing site. The 4x4x4 is really pretty similar to the 3x3x3, except with extra algorithms needed for the new peices that are present. If you can solve a 3x3x3, you're most of the way to the 4x4x4. The 5x5x5 is a similar extension of the 4x4x4.
For the record, I can solve the 4x4x4, but my times are pretty awful. I don't have good algorithms for solving those extra peices, and I don't do it often enough. On the 3x3x3, though, I can consistently do it in 1:30, and that's just with home-grown algorithms some friends and I came up with.
I would rather be killed by a terrorist than enslaved by my government.
Because humans also get their power (ultimately) from the sun.
What they neglect to tell you is that if you solve this puzzle, you get to meet and be a permanent guest of Pinhead and his fellow Cenobites.
This space unintentionally left blank.
Kltpzyxm!
Hardly, mine was made by a German professor named Bandelow who was a big name in early cube studies. Actually, I find the 5x5x5 easier than the 4x4x4. The fact that you always have the centers there to orient you makes a huge difference. Also, there's a kind of parity error that requires you to scramble already placed pieces that only occurs in the 4x4x4 (and any other even size). It's annoying, because you can only know you have it when you've already placed most of the cube which you then have to re-solve. The system called the "Ultimate Solution" gave a really good description of how to solve any size cube, but has unfortunately recently disappeared from the Internet aside from its ghost in the Wayback Machine.
The fourth dimension is time isn't it? Or is this six dimensional?
If the pattern goes 9am, 10am, 11am, why isn't noon 12am?
It was inevitable somebody would start quoting timecube.
Solving it makes you invisible to girls. I think you also become the master of time, but haven't been able to confirm it yesterday. BTW - solving the 4D version gets you beat up by jocks. Very hard level to get past.
Are you sure? We could just be programmed to think that is true :)
Why is it that when you believe something it's an opinion, but when I believe something it's a manifesto?