Hi Twisty Puzzles fans,

Slidey 2x2x2 is a sliding pieces puzzle with 24 sliding pieces around a spherical core. Unlike regular sliding pieces, this one does not have a free space. So some people would consider it to be a twisty puzzle. Others might not.

Note that although this puzzle looks similar to Skeneegee's Babyface puzzle, it has a quite different operation (the faces don't turn) and a completely different mechanism (grooved sphere).

Watch the YouTube video.
But the puzzle from my Shapeways Shop.
Read more at the Shapeways Forum.
Check out the photos below.

Enjoy!

Oskar

Very interesting concept, Oskar

Very nice Oskar. Shortly I should be starting my Slidey 4x4x4 puzzle.

Looks like a
FacesOnly4x4x4RestrictedToSliceMoves ...
No, this is no name suggestion.

Ah, an edges-only void 3x3x3

Very nice, Oskar!

Although you constructed it with distinctive "slidey" elements, this puzzle does fit nicely into my classifications of other twisty puzzles so I have no problem calling it a pure twisy puzzle. In fact, I bet you could design a mech for this that doesn't involve "slidey" parts.

Peace,
Matt Galla


Edit: changed "and" to "an" in my first sentence. As it is a somewhat profound statemnet, I wnated it to be correct Sorry it was a little unclear at first

Edit 2:
*statement
*wanted

sigh.....

Ok, I see that. And I agree with Matt that this is a pure twisty puzzle.

However, I don't see how this can be viewed as an edges-only void 3x3x3. Is this a joke? I see the at the end of that line. Confused.

Carl

Took me a sec to see it. It's like the corner circle pieces on the Circle 3x3. Or I guess just the circle pieces on the Circle 2x2. These pieces correspond to sides of edge pieces.
Thank you for that Allagem. I was trying to figure out what the analogous puzzle would be.

Are any of the pieces bandaged to the core?

I thought someone would enjoy that Sorry I muddled it up a little by typing "and" instead of "an". Yes GuiltyBystander got it right, this is equivalent to an edges-only void 3x3x3 in a rather unexpected, but completely mathematically sound way. The two puzzles may be considered mathematically identical/analgous. Solving one solves the other and vice-versa. There is a bijection between the two puzzles. etc.

The Circle 2x2x2 mentioned above is actually non symmetric since some faces rotate the circle and some don't. If you were to edit the Circle 2x2 so that every circle stayed fixed as you rotate the face around it, the circle pieces would exactly match Oskar's Slidey 2x2x2. Anyone who is truly thinking about this should realize the problem with a 2x2x2 in which every circle stays still as you rotate the face around it. Every move is ambiguous. U for example could just as easily be D. In this case, which circle stays still? the U circle or the D circle? The answer is simply that in this "Fully Functional Circle 2x2x2", unlike the current circle 2x2x2 and normal 2x2x2, U and D do not have identical results. You would basically have to pinch the U and D circles together and specify relative to the pinched circles whether you are rotating U or D. Since the two are not the same, you really have a 3x3x3. The "middle" layer is the combination of opposite circles on each axis. You can think of Oskar's Slidey 2x2x2 puzzle as this "FF Circle 2x2x2" except where the "circles" are larger than the puzzle itself i.e. the entire face is within the circle. Then what you are looking at is this representation of the 3x3x3 edges (no centers, no corners).

Long story short, there are no pieces bandaged to the core on Oskar's Slidey 2x2x2 because there is an implicit middle layer present on the puzzle. This middle layer can be rotated independently of the other two by rotating just the square faces of two opposite sides at the same time. Oskar's Slidey 2x2x2 is a 3 layered puzzle (what many of you would call 3rd order; although I would call 1st order, but I do lots of things differently )

Sorry about that typo in my first post. I tried to make a profound statement without proof and ended up just not making sense....

Peace,
Matt Galla

Ok... I see it now. I think. Each face and the face directly opposite it are showing the two opposite sides of a 3x3x3 edge piece. Interesting.... since opposite sides of this cubie are seen and not adjacent sides the pieces are now no longer unique but you have 3 sets of four similiarly colored edges, and each edge is two discontinuous slidey parts on this puzzle.

In fact if I'm looking at this correctly this is EXACLY the issue the 3x3x3 edge pieces have in my Real5x5x5© puzzle.

Carl

P.S. So I guess this means FacesOnly4x4x4RestrictedToSliceMoves = EdgesOnlyVoid3x3x3. I never realized that the 4x4x4 Faces were related to the 3x3x3 Edges in this fashion before. Its the restriction to slice moves only that turns the 4x4x4 into a 3x3x3...

Now I'm curious about how of other pieces of the full Slice Moves Only 4x4x4 map to the 3x3x3.
I believe the 8 corners of the Slice Moves Only 4x4x4 map to the core of the 3x3x3.
The 2x2x2 inside the Slice Moves Only Multi-4x4x4 maps to the corners of the 3x3x3.
So I guess that means the edges of the Slice Moves Only 4x4x4 map to the face centers of a 3x3x3. Yes... they do as 4 discontinuous parts for each face center.

So someone needs to take a Crazy 4x4x4 (so you can see the inner 2x2x2) and bandage all the corners together. You then have this inside out 3x3x3 of sorts. Very cool...

Carl

Thank you Carl. I now understand how this is the same as an edges only 3x3x3. One could simulate this puzzle by removing the corners and stickers of a 3x3x3. If the sides of the edges are stickered it would be this puzzle, correct?

This is a really cool puzzle! Great work Oskar

Alright I thought a picture would now be useful for anyone not sure what's going on here. If you look at the first picture Oskar posted, and then at the following picture, I think you'll see the correlation:

(I did this from a slightly different angle because looking at a corner dead on produces an ambiguous visual that is quite creepy)
So yes, PuzzleMaster6262, if this is what you had in mind, you're right
And now seeing this, I must take back my previous statement. While the pieces of Oskar's Slidey 2x2x2 and an edges only void cube have identical behaviours, the mathematical pieces of Oskar's puzzle are not uniquely defined and thus come in 3 sets of 4 each. (this is also quite interesting because even though there are 24 physical pieces plus a core in Oskar's puzzle, opposite pieces are mathematically locked together, much like the thin pieces on a crazy 4x4x4 II). Therefore, beginning with Oskar's Slidey 2x2x2 and an edges only void cube scrambled to the same state: solving the edges only void cube guarantees that Oskar's Slidey 2x2x2 will be solved, but not the other way around as identical pieces can be swapped on Oskar's Slidey 2x2x2 but not on the edges only void 3x3x3. (throughout all of this I am assuming the edges only void 3x3x3 is colored the standard way, not the way in the picture)

And yes Carl, these do have the same issue as the 3x3x3 edge pieces of your Real 5x5x5, and again the same technique of applying a superstickering pattern that uniquely identifies each piece will "fix" the "problem" and Oskar's Slidey 2x2x2 would be identical to an edges only void 3x3x3.

Peace,
Matt Galla

PS Carl actually mentioned the identical pieces issue in his post, so I guess the only thing I have to add is the picture