Online since 2002. Over 3300 puzzles, 2600 worldwide members, and 270,000 messages.

TwistyPuzzles.com Forum

It is currently Sun Apr 20, 2014 7:09 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3096 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39 ... 62  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Wed Jun 30, 2010 1:08 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 8:41 am
Location: The Blue Mountains, Australia
gelatinbrain wrote:
Mmm,... Solved color wise but still remains jumbled. Indeed an interesting case. I didn't expect such a case. But this should be judged as "solved".
Hmm I'd be tempted to say, even though it means I don't get the record, that it shouldn't count. Mainly because if i knew how to solve it properly I'd be annoyed if someone solved it like that in less moves than i could solve it completely and they got the record not me.
I suppose in the end it is up to you but I'd like to hear what some of the other solvers here like Brandon and Julian have to say about it as well.

Edit:

That aside i just did the 12 colour one colour and shape completely :D
Attachment:
12 colour.jpg
12 colour.jpg [ 106.28 KiB | Viewed 3481 times ]
The submit box came up and all i just submitted it before i took the screen shot. The problem with that is the bit at the end i am not exactly sure what i did. I must admit i was a little desperate and kind of fuged it, taking it out of shape then rearranging then putting it back in shape untill i got it to a point i could do a three cycle hence the move count. It's very annoying to see a three cycle and think you know how to do it then half way through find the puzzle just cant turn because it's jumbled.

Anyone else going to try this type of sphere? I am far from completely understanding them and someone else's insight might help.

_________________
Some PBs
3x3x3 :20.7 seconds, 5x5x5 2:33, gigaminx 16:40, 7x7x7 9:48, pyraminx crystal 3:42


Last edited by Elwyn on Wed Jun 30, 2010 8:33 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Wed Jun 30, 2010 8:04 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2009 5:06 pm
Location: Berkeley, CA, USA
Elwyn wrote:
Anyone else going to try this type of sphere? I am far from understanding them and someone else's insight might help.


I will definitely going to try the spherical puzzles, but I'll do it after solving the 3.9.2*, coz 3.9.2* are more tractable (and the only puzzles that I haven't solved besides spheres). Currently I don't know how to solve any spherical puzzles and I generally don't like puzzles that jumble.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Wed Jun 30, 2010 1:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 8:54 pm
Location: Bay Area, California
Elwyn wrote:
Hmm I'd be tempted to say, even though it means I don't get the record, that it shouldn't count. Mainly because if i knew how to solve it properly I'd be annoyed if someone solved it like that in less moves than i could solve it completely and they got the record not me.
I suppose in the end it is up to you but I'd like to hear what some of the other solvers here like Brandon and Julian have to say about it as well.

I wanted to chime in yesterday and say the same thing but I didn't want to come across as trying to degrade your impressive achievement. Aligned cuts are definitely part of the puzzle.

I haven't tried twisting the 6.2.1 puzzle at all. It seemed like 6.1.1b would be the easiest sphere but I couldn't make any progress unjumbling it. I have so many puzzles I want to work on and so little time :cry:

_________________
Prior to using my real name I posted under the account named bmenrigh.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Wed Jun 30, 2010 2:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 12:15 pm
Location: Sandnes, Norway
I decided to join in on the fun :D So far I've only solved 1.1.1b and 1.1.2, which was rather easy. At the moment I'm trying to figure out 1.1.4, but no luck so far. I have never tried solving a puzzle where the centers aren't stationary. Also I'm not especially good at solving dodecahedra s in general, something that doesn't make it any easier.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Wed Jun 30, 2010 2:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 2:57 pm
Location: Pittsburgh
Katten wrote:
I decided to join in on the fun :D So far I've only solved 1.1.1b and 1.1.2, which was rather easy. At the moment I'm trying to figure out 1.1.4, but no luck so far. I have never tried solving a puzzle where the centers aren't stationary. Also I'm not especially good at solving dodecahedra s in general, something that doesn't make it any easier.

Start with some cubes then!

_________________
3x3x3 PB: 00:48.10
"Study gravitation, it's a field with a lot of potential."
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Wed Jun 30, 2010 2:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 12:15 pm
Location: Sandnes, Norway
It's more fun when it's difficult :D But I think I will try the master Pyraminx Crytal instead. I always wanted one, since the Pyraminx Crystal is my favorite puzzle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Wed Jun 30, 2010 3:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 8:54 pm
Location: Bay Area, California
Katten wrote:
It's more fun when it's difficult :D But I think I will try the master Pyraminx Crytal instead. I always wanted one, since the Pyraminx Crystal is my favorite puzzle.

Welcome to the club :D

I love the 1.1.x series too but I think you'll find 1.1.4 moderately hard the first go. The centers are pretty easy but those small little triangles in the center take some work to figure out. I was helped quite a bit on 1.1.4 back on page 29. I've found that with most of the puzzles with mobile centers, you can usually solve the centers last of close to last. It's a bit counter-intuitive if you come from a big-cube background when you usually build up and place them first.

If the centers on 1.1.10 frustrate you too much do 1.1.11 first. You might also really like 1.1.22, 1.1.29, and 1.1.37.

_________________
Prior to using my real name I posted under the account named bmenrigh.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Wed Jun 30, 2010 4:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 12:15 pm
Location: Sandnes, Norway
Thanks :D Yes, I found it pretty hard having mobile centers all of a sudden. Never encountered that on a puzzle with fixed centers before. But - I will figure it out eventually :D Thanks for the pointers and the page reference, but I will wait until I have given it my best shot to solve it by myself :D

1.1.22 looks really fascinating, can't wait to try it!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Thu Jul 01, 2010 4:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 12:15 pm
Location: Sandnes, Norway
Wow, currently I'm doing 1.1.17, and I've come this far:

Attachment:
Prosjekt 1.1.17 OPDATERING.jpg
Prosjekt 1.1.17 OPDATERING.jpg [ 153.24 KiB | Viewed 3391 times ]


I know it says I spent 10 hours doing it, but 9 of those were spent sleeping, as I didn't want to shut my computer down and start over :lol: It did however take me over 800 moves to get to this point. I must say I find this puzzle rather challenging, though extremely fascinating and fun.

I have not decided on what my next move will be, as I had enough trouble placing those 6 centers as it is :shock:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Thu Jul 01, 2010 6:38 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 8:41 am
Location: The Blue Mountains, Australia
Not to nit pick but that's not 1.1.17 :wink: it's 1.1.10.
Nice job i still find the centres on that a little weird and the last two are rather annoying i'd say. The good news is the centres are the hardest part of the puzzle by far the bad news is, as i said, the next 6 are going to be much harder. good luck! Also if you want a hint i'm pretty sure i can give you one that will help but not give away the puzzle completely.

_________________
Some PBs
3x3x3 :20.7 seconds, 5x5x5 2:33, gigaminx 16:40, 7x7x7 9:48, pyraminx crystal 3:42


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Thu Jul 01, 2010 9:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 12:15 pm
Location: Sandnes, Norway
It is? It says 1.1.17 here, I double checked it :shock: But it doesn't matter! I'm getting the hang of this, and I'm currently working on the last two centers. Actually the 4 centers I've done just now were a lot easier after I figured out a better way to do it :D At first I was completely lost. Thank you, but I'll try to complete the last two centers for myself first. If I have trouble I'll ask for your hint :D

EDIT: Haha, you're totally right about that number. I didn't realize I read the number belonging to the puzzle below it :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Thu Jul 01, 2010 9:40 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 12:15 pm
Location: Sandnes, Norway
Last two centers done in 1 minute 8-) If you're right, now all that's left is the easy part :D


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Fri Jul 02, 2010 4:00 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 8:41 am
Location: The Blue Mountains, Australia
Katten wrote:
Last two centers done in 1 minute If you're right, now all that's left is the easy part
I see you've finished it, unless Katja on the records page and you are different people but i doubt that. Nice work. Now you have finished i might make a suggestion if you solve it again try using some of the tricks from here viewtopic.php?p=202015#p202015 (i know that's for gigaminx but the basic idea works on allot of puzzles).

_________________
Some PBs
3x3x3 :20.7 seconds, 5x5x5 2:33, gigaminx 16:40, 7x7x7 9:48, pyraminx crystal 3:42


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Fri Jul 02, 2010 5:14 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 8:41 am
Location: The Blue Mountains, Australia
bmenrigh wrote:
I haven't tried twisting the 6.2.1 puzzle at all. It seemed like 6.1.1b would be the easiest sphere but I couldn't make any progress unjumbling it. I have so many puzzles I want to work on and so little time
So i just solved the 8 colour version of the spheres i have been working on, 6.2.1b. I'm pretty sure 6.2.1 are the easiest of the three types of sphere. That said i still spent a little while near the end of the solve looking blankly at the puzzle with no idea what to do but i thought of something in the end :lol: I don't bother trying to completely un jumble them at the start i just do bits at a time, this does however make the end a little restricted. You should give them a go.

_________________
Some PBs
3x3x3 :20.7 seconds, 5x5x5 2:33, gigaminx 16:40, 7x7x7 9:48, pyraminx crystal 3:42


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Fri Jul 02, 2010 6:43 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 12:15 pm
Location: Sandnes, Norway
Elwyn wrote:
Katten wrote:
Last two centers done in 1 minute If you're right, now all that's left is the easy part
I see you've finished it, unless Katja on the records page and you are different people but i doubt that. Nice work. Now you have finished i might make a suggestion if you solve it again try using some of the tricks from here http://www.twistypuzzles.com/forum/view ... 15#p202015 (i know that's for gigaminx but the basic idea works on allot of puzzles).


Yes, that's me :D Thanks, next time I will solve it all at once, so the solving time will be more genuine. Ok, I'll check it out and try to solve it according to those tricks. The second solve will be much smoother anyways, as I now have a much better understanding of the puzzle all together.

Those spheres though, they look really intimmidating! Great job solving the 8 colour one :D Can't wait to try it for myself.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Fri Jul 02, 2010 3:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 12:15 pm
Location: Sandnes, Norway
AAAAAARG! I was well on my way to solving 1.1.10 with your Gigaminx solution method. And then guess what happens? My browser shut down, and I have to start all over :cry: I managed to take a picture of it, close to the way it was before Firefox shut down. In addition to this I also had the bottom part of 3 of the top centers.

Attachment:
Prosjekt 1.1.10 Alternativ metode 1.jpg
Prosjekt 1.1.10 Alternativ metode 1.jpg [ 79.07 KiB | Viewed 3148 times ]


By the way, I really like this method and I might just start using it when I solve my C4Y Gigaminx and other dodecahedra :D


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Sat Jul 03, 2010 4:01 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 8:41 am
Location: The Blue Mountains, Australia
I just re solved 1.1.15 and it took 479 moves? that beats not only my last solve by more than half but also the previous record by 200 moves. I don't remember my method from last time but i remember it being very different and very complex in comparison to what i did this time :D. Just goes to show some of these old records can be quite thoroughly beaten with just a small insight. Also makes me wonder what on earth i was thinking the first time i solved it hahaha.
Katten wrote:
And then guess what happens? My browser shut down, and I have to start all over
That's happened to me before too it's not fun at all. At least the scramble, initialise and clear buttons give a warning now. I lost many solves because i missed the undo button when they didn't hahaha.

_________________
Some PBs
3x3x3 :20.7 seconds, 5x5x5 2:33, gigaminx 16:40, 7x7x7 9:48, pyraminx crystal 3:42


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Sat Jul 03, 2010 5:09 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 12:15 pm
Location: Sandnes, Norway
I did re-do it though, and I spent 1 hour and 1 second :lol: Would have been sub-1 hour if I hadn't accidentally misplaced two centers. But still, I'm happy with my performance. I think my next attempt will be 1.1.4, 1.1.5 or 1.1.11.

1.1.15 in less than 500 moves? :shock: I'm impressed. Is that by any chance a larger version of 1.1.5?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Sat Jul 03, 2010 4:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 8:54 pm
Location: Bay Area, California
Katten wrote:
I did re-do it though, and I spent 1 hour and 1 second :lol: Would have been sub-1 hour if I hadn't accidentally misplaced two centers. But still, I'm happy with my performance. I think my next attempt will be 1.1.4, 1.1.5 or 1.1.11.
You'll breeze through 1.1.11. It's basically the same as 1.1.10 but with easier centers.

1.1.4 and 1.1.5 are very closely related but you'll want to do 1.1.4 first because the 3-color corners provide a nice reference. The small triangles in the centers of 1.1.4 are very important for progressing through many of the other dodecahedra. They come up often in other puzzles just like the 1.1.3 edges come up frequently.
Katten wrote:
1.1.15 in less than 500 moves? :shock: I'm impressed. Is that by any chance a larger version of 1.1.5?
Yeah, very impressive solve Elwyn! 1.1.15 is like two puzzles in one. You can solve the inner puzzle ignoring the outer shell. I didn't realize this at first and so I used some very inefficient algorithms to preserve the outer faces until about 75% of the way through my solve.

To me 1.1.15 doesn't seem any closer to 1.1.5 than it is to 1.1.8 or 1.1.1.

_________________
Prior to using my real name I posted under the account named bmenrigh.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Sat Jul 03, 2010 11:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 8:41 am
Location: The Blue Mountains, Australia
What is happening here?
Attachment:
problem.JPG
problem.JPG [ 187.91 KiB | Viewed 3086 times ]
It happens on only some of the puzzles i.e. 1.1.6 doesn't work, all i get when i try to open it is this page but 1.1.7 works like normal :?
Katten wrote:
Is that by any chance a larger version of 1.1.5?
I don't understand what you mean by larger?
bmenrigh wrote:
To me 1.1.15 doesn't seem any closer to 1.1.5 than it is to 1.1.8 or 1.1.1.
I wouldn't say that because it does have starminx (1.1.5) cuts mixed with very shallow megaminx cuts just as 1.1.19 has pentultimate cuts mixed with shallow cuts. If it didn't have those shallow cuts it would solve like a truncated 1.1.5 or just like 1.1.4 so they are related in how they turn but as far as solving surprisingly i solved it more like it's visual twin 1.3.6 but if you really wanted you could solve all but the wide triangles just like 1.1.4 it would just take 2 turns (one shallow one deeper) to simulate a 1.1.4/1.1.5 turn. It can't on the other hand be solved like 1.1.8.
Katten wrote:
I think my next attempt will be 1.1.4, 1.1.5 or 1.1.11.
As Brandon said 1.1.11 won't be anything new to you. 1.1.5/4 one the other hand will probably be rather hard. The first time i did 1.1.5 i found it hard because it was the first puzzle where the only way to solve one type of piece (to my knowledge) was to cycle them three at a time using a commutator and difficult set-up moves. good luck if you try them.

_________________
Some PBs
3x3x3 :20.7 seconds, 5x5x5 2:33, gigaminx 16:40, 7x7x7 9:48, pyraminx crystal 3:42


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Sun Jul 04, 2010 3:35 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 12:15 pm
Location: Sandnes, Norway
Elwyn wrote:
I don't understand what you mean by larger?
What I meant was if it is a higher order version of 1.1.5. Bad choice of wording, my bad.
bmenrigh wrote:
To me 1.1.15 doesn't seem any closer to 1.1.5 than it is to 1.1.8 or 1.1.1.
I guess you're right. After barely studying it I thought they looked a lot alike.
bmenrigh wrote:
You'll breeze through 1.1.11. It's basically the same as 1.1.10 but with easier centers.
Yes, 1.1.11 was really easy. No problem at all :D

But over to what is a problem for me at the moment; 1.1.4. As you said earlier bmenrigh the centers weren't the hardest part. It's those tiny triangle pieces for sure. I have tried multiple solving methods, and all have failed due to those. At one point I had almost all faces solved, in exception of those, but then I got completely stuck and decided to start over using a different approach. At the moment I'm trying to get a better grip of the puzzle by solving complete faces, and try to understand how all the pieces interact with each other. It helped some and right now I have almost two complete faces:

Attachment:
Prosjekt 1.1.4 underveis2.jpg
Prosjekt 1.1.4 underveis2.jpg [ 68.1 KiB | Viewed 3078 times ]


But I'm wondering. What steps should I follow to solve this? By steps I mean like the four steps in the Friedrich method; cross, f2l, oll and pll etc. I'm kinda stuborn and prefer getting as little help as possible :lol: But I'll have to see if having some steps to work from will be enough help, or if I'll have to ask for some more :shock:
Elwyn wrote:
It happens on only some of the puzzles i.e. 1.1.6 doesn't work, all i get when i try to open it is this page but 1.1.7 works like normal
That's really strange. 1.1.6 works just fine here. Maybe it's been fixed :D


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Sun Jul 04, 2010 4:29 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 8:41 am
Location: The Blue Mountains, Australia
Katten wrote:
That's really strange. 1.1.6 works just fine here. Maybe it's been fixed
Well it still happens but what is even more odd is it works if i go through the file menu (top left of the puzzle screen) but not if i try and go to the puzzle by the main page :?
Katten wrote:
What steps should I follow to solve this?
So far the only method i've heard has been used is solving it by piece type. Corners then edges then centre pentagons then centre triangles. That last part, the triangles, is the hard part.

_________________
Some PBs
3x3x3 :20.7 seconds, 5x5x5 2:33, gigaminx 16:40, 7x7x7 9:48, pyraminx crystal 3:42


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Sun Jul 04, 2010 5:22 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 12:15 pm
Location: Sandnes, Norway
If I understand correctly, I am using the right approach.
Katten wrote:
So far the only method i've heard has been used is solving it by piece type. Corners then edges then centre pentagons then centre triangles. That last part, the triangles, is the hard part.
Unless you mean that I should go about solving all the corners on the puzzle, then all the edges etc?

Oh yes, those triangles are giving me a hard time! But I have completed two and a half faces now, so I'm at least making progress :D
Elwyn wrote:
Well it still happens but what is even more odd is it works if i go through the file menu (top left of the puzzle screen) but not if i try and go to the puzzle by the main page
You may have come across a software bug there. I am no expert but that does sound a little weird. Maybe you should email the creator about it?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Sun Jul 04, 2010 5:53 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 8:41 am
Location: The Blue Mountains, Australia
Katten wrote:
Unless you mean that I should go about solving all the corners on the puzzle, then all the edges etc?
That's how i do it :wink:
Katten wrote:
Maybe you should email the creator about it?
I have just sent Gelatinbrain a PM about it but as long as i can access them through the file menu it doesn't really bother me that the link doesn't work for me.

_________________
Some PBs
3x3x3 :20.7 seconds, 5x5x5 2:33, gigaminx 16:40, 7x7x7 9:48, pyraminx crystal 3:42


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Sun Jul 04, 2010 7:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 12:15 pm
Location: Sandnes, Norway
Well, I'm stuck again :lol: But this time I got much closer to solving it:
Attachment:
Prosjekt 1.1.4 underveis3.jpg
Prosjekt 1.1.4 underveis3.jpg [ 66.1 KiB | Viewed 3053 times ]
I almost completed the 6 bottom faces using the face-completing-approach. Even though I'm almost out of ideas on how to finish with this method, I believe I've come one step closer to solving it completely, as I've picked up some useful tricks and information (hopefully :shock: ) along the way. If it gets to the point where I decide to start over I will solve it piece by piece, as you suggested. But before I do that, I'll try once more to complete it the way it is right now. Either way, I won't give up until it's fully solved, and hopefully I'll be able to do it mostly by myself :D


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Mon Jul 05, 2010 2:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 12:15 pm
Location: Sandnes, Norway
Attachment:
Prosjekt 1.1.4 LØST.jpg
Prosjekt 1.1.4 LØST.jpg [ 67.98 KiB | Viewed 3011 times ]
SOLVED! :D Finally. I ended up solving it piece by piece, but still, this was really hard. I will never underestimate a puzzles ever again.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Mon Jul 05, 2010 5:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 8:54 pm
Location: Bay Area, California
Katten wrote:
SOLVED! :D Finally. I ended up solving it piece by piece, but still, this was really hard.
Great job, I wish I'd had the skill to come up with my own solution to the small triangles. I'm curious what you finally came up with.
Katten wrote:
I will never underestimate a puzzles ever again.
Be careful there, I really held myself back because I overestimated a lot of puzzles. There are some real hard ones up on Gelatinbrain's site but most are totally doable! Dozens of times I have finished a solve and said to myself "that wasn't so bad, what what I so afraid of?".

If you're looking for extensions of 1.1.4, try 1.1.5. 1.1.20 looks beastly but if you can figure out how to pair edges it should be roughly the same as 2 solves of 1.1.5. 1.1.42 is also basically two solves of 1.1.5.

You might also give 1.1.21 some twists. It's visually complex but you already know how to solve it.

_________________
Prior to using my real name I posted under the account named bmenrigh.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Mon Jul 05, 2010 6:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 12:15 pm
Location: Sandnes, Norway
bmenrigh wrote:
I'm curious what you finally came up with.
I'm not really sure how to explain it, I have the tendency to be rather bad at that. But I'll try: I kinda used an extension of the way I 3-cycled the centers. I did that somewhat the same way as I would do the edges on the Pyraminx Crystal; L R' L' R and then I would move the center at the front face out of the way and do the inverse. Which would 3-cycle the centers plus 6 of the triangles. So what I discovered was that if I did a few moves following that, and then repeating the entire process, it would swap only 3 triangles. I don't really know how I got to that conclusion, I usually just experiment and try out a lot of different move sequences, but that undo button sure came in handy :lol: Also, look apart from the fact that I spent every waken moment of the last 48 hours trying to solve this puzzle :D

But I have to admit, I did go to page 29 to look for some advise, but I'm not good with advanced notation or commutators and stuff like that, so most of it didn't help too much, though it did give me some ideas.
bmenrigh wrote:
If you're looking for extensions of 1.1.4, try 1.1.5.
1.1.5 will not be the next puzzle I solve, for sure. Solving 1.1.4 did feel great, but the amount of concentration I had to use and the complexity of the puzzle almost got too much for me :shock: I will solve 1.1.5 some time, but for now I'll skip to something else and save the few living brain cells I have left (I love the irony).


Last edited by Katja on Tue Jul 06, 2010 1:57 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Mon Jul 05, 2010 8:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 8:54 pm
Location: Bay Area, California
Katten wrote:
bmenrigh wrote:
I'm curious what you finally came up with.
I'm not really sure how to explain it, I have the tendency to be rather bad at that. But I'll try: I kinda used an extension of the way I 3-cycled the centers. I did that somewhat the same way as I would do the edges on the Pyraminx Crystal; L R' L' R and then I would move the center at the front face out of the way and do the inverse. Which would 3-cycle the centers plus 6 of the triangles. So what I discovered was that if I did a few moves following that, and then repeating the entire process, it would swap only 3 triangles. I don't really know how I got to that conclusion, I usually just experiment and try out a lot of different move sequences, but that undo button sure came in handy :lol: Also, look apart from the fact that I spent every waking moment of the last 48 hours trying to solve this puzzle :D
This is basically exactly how I tried to solve them myself. Using L R' L' R (which, by the way is a (1,1) commutator) I was able to 3-cycle centers and a few triangles. By doing a few moves after that I could undo the centers but leave 2 pairs of triangles in a 3-cycle. I took a screen-shot of that on page 30. In all it was 30 moves. I saw how to then do a move and then undo all of the first 30 but that would have made for a 62 move algorithm which I wasn't willing to use to solve.
Katten wrote:
But I have to admit, I did go to page 29 to look for some advise, but I'm not good with advanced notation or commutators and stuff like that, so most of it didn't help too much, though it did give me some ideas.
I suppose the math (group theory) behind commutators is complicated but the basic notation used in this thread is quite straight-forward.

The idea for a commutator is to do some sequence of setup moves to get the puzzle in the right position to do useful work. We'll call those moves X. Then you do the work, well call those Y. Then you undo X (said to be X'). If you stop here you have a conjugate. If you proceed to undo Y you have a commutator.

That is: X Y X' Y' or in this thread's notation: (X,Y).

Your Pyraminx Crystal L R' L' R sequence is a commutator where X = L and Y = R'. Since X has 1 move and Y has 1 move we usually write that as (1,1).
Katten wrote:
bmenrigh wrote:
If you're looking for extensions of 1.1.4, try 1.1.5.
1.1.5 will not be the next puzzle I solve, for sure. Solving 1.1.4 did feel great, but the amount of concentration I had to use and the complexity of the puzzle almost got too much for me :shock: I will solve 1.1.5 some time, but for now I'll skip to something else and save the few living brain cells I have left (I love the irony).
I felt the same way when I finally solved 1.1.4 -- mentally spent. My last 3-cycle to finish the puzzle required like 6 setup moves and at least 5 tries resulting in a bunch of undos before I got it right. With experience you get a lot more comfortable doing a bunch of complex setup moves. By the time I got around to solving 2.1.1 I was doing as many as 10 setup moves before cycling the small 2-color triangles. I find the bigger puzzles to be much easier to undo setup moves on. With 1.1.4 I had to memorize the sequence so I could undo it. On the bigger puzzles I can usually just see the order in which they need to be undone.

In short, you're doing great :D

_________________
Prior to using my real name I posted under the account named bmenrigh.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Mon Jul 05, 2010 10:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 8:41 am
Location: The Blue Mountains, Australia
Katten wrote:
SOLVED! Finally.
Nice work. i Didn't do it all myself when i first did that puzzle as i used Noah's (4,1) 3 cycle for the triangles i found somewhere in this thread but i've since found my own, different, (3,1). I did the centres a little different using something i found myself though just [ R' L R l' ]X3 as a two two swap. Next time you feel like frying your brain with a hard puzzle again i'd suggest the pentultimate 1.1.7. probably my favourite puzzle on the site as it is very hard but can be solved in very few moves and little time. You already know how to solve the pentagonal centres you just have to figure out how to cycle the corners and orient them... or do both at the same time 8-)
But if you want something a little easier imbetween I strongly suggest 1.1.29. It has a trick to it that's hard to spot at first and you still have to think a little bit when solving it but overall the puzzle isn't too hard.
bmenrigh wrote:
You might also give 1.1.21 some twists. It's visually complex but you already know how to solve it.
Hahaha i remember giving you some very similar advice a few months ago :)

Edit i just re-solved 1.1.29 and got the move count record with 153 moves :)

_________________
Some PBs
3x3x3 :20.7 seconds, 5x5x5 2:33, gigaminx 16:40, 7x7x7 9:48, pyraminx crystal 3:42


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Tue Jul 06, 2010 4:03 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 8:54 pm
Location: Bay Area, California
Elwyn wrote:
bmenrigh wrote:
You might also give 1.1.21 some twists. It's visually complex but you already know how to solve it.
Hahaha i remember giving you some very similar advice a few months ago :)
It was good advice :wink:
Elwyn wrote:
Edit i just re-solved 1.1.29 and got the move count record with 153 moves :)
Whoa, that would have landed you in 4th on 1.1.1! You should go back and and challenge Michael's 127 moves...

Recently I have been thinking about developing a hill climbing algorithm to solve puzzles in few moves. I'm pretty sure with the appropriate heuristics I can avoid local maxima. I plan on coding it for 1.1.12 as a proof-of-concept before I tackle the bigger puzzles. That will have to wait until I'm done with school though :(

_________________
Prior to using my real name I posted under the account named bmenrigh.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Tue Jul 06, 2010 4:14 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 12:15 pm
Location: Sandnes, Norway
bmenrigh wrote:
I saw how to then do a move and then undo all of the first 30 but that would have made for a 62 move algorithm which I wasn't willing to use to solve.
Yeah, mine was really long as well, I think it was between 30 or 40 moves. Quite inefficient, but it got the job done! But it would be great if either one of you could share your triangle-swapping commutator, so I can use it in other solves and improve my time and move count drastically, as my solve using my way contained over 3000 moves and took more than 3 hours. Now that I've actually finished it, I'm all for learning other ways to do it :lol:
bmenrigh wrote:
Your Pyraminx Crystal L R' L' R sequence is a commutator where X = L and Y = R'. Since X has 1 move and Y has 1 move we usually write that as (1,1).
If I understood this correctly, a (3,1) commutator would look something like this:

((X' Y' X) Z (X' Y X) Z' )

I actually have an example in this case, which I came up with to permute corners on for instance the Megaminx, a 3x3 etc:

U’ L’U R U’ L U R’

I had no idea I've been using commutators in my solves for almost 2 years now, as I've not been familiar with the term "commutator" until now. But I do believe this knowledge will help me solve more applets more efficiently.
bmenrigh wrote:
My last 3-cycle to finish the puzzle required like 6 setup moves and at least 5 tries resulting in a bunch of undos before I got it right.
If was like that for me as well. I think my last setup move contained almost 10 moves. So naturally I screwed it up the first try, but I got it the second time :D
Elwyn wrote:
Next time you feel like frying your brain with a hard puzzle again i'd suggest the pentultimate 1.1.7.
Am I completely wrong if I assume that the pentultimate is just a skewb dodecahedra? It sure looks that way. Also it looks like a challenge, therefore I'll be giving it a try in the near future :D
Elwyn wrote:
Edit i just re-solved 1.1.29 and got the move count record with 153 moves
Great job! :D I haven't tried any circle puzzles yet, they look like they would be easy, but something tells me they're not :shock:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:04 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 2:57 pm
Location: Pittsburgh
Okay, today at work (if I go in) I'm starting the tetrahedra. Then hexahedra. Octahedra will follow, then dodecahedra. Then icosahedra and then... SPHERES. :( I've played with the spheres before and just got sad.

_________________
3x3x3 PB: 00:48.10
"Study gravitation, it's a field with a lot of potential."
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:06 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 8:41 am
Location: The Blue Mountains, Australia
Katten wrote:
But it would be great if either one of you could share your triangle-swapping commutator
All right here's one i found myself I might be the only one who knows it but Julian said he had a (3,1) as well and that is probably the same thing

E2, C&2, E'2, C, E2, C'&2, E'2, C'

or more clearly E2, C&2, E'2, isolates a triangle C, moves said triangle E2, C'&2, E'2, undoes the first part C' undoes the second part 8 moves in total (3,1)

That is in gelatinbrain's notation which i never really liked but you can copy and paste the whole thing into the algorithm bar and then use undo to see what it actually does. you can use it in the form it is or any variation such as changing the C to C2 or C' or C2' (4 options) or swap E2 for E2' (2 options) or even changing C&2 to C2&2 or other C&2 turns (4 options). you can also use the right hand equivalent as in

D'2, F'&2, D2, F', D'2, F&2, D2, F

and the variants of it as well. Both put together i'm pretty sure that gives you 64 different variants :o plus all of thier inverses so 128 :shock: is that right? Each variant swaps three pieces from slightly different positions (except the inverses they do the same positions but cycle the pieces in the other direction) on the puzzle. That means if there are three pieces you want to cycle and you would need lots of set-ups using a slightly different version of the commutator could reduce the amount of set-ups or even mean you need none at all. I try to find perfect 3 cycles, as in solve three triangles every time i use the alg but that isn't always possible and only necessary if you are trying to get fewest moves records :lol: but i do suggest trying to solve them 2 at a time. Well that's my alg and a short guide to using commutators efficiently. There is also Noah's C2, F'2, C'2, F2, B&2, F'2, C2, F2, C'2, B'&2,
But it's not quite as versatile (as in not as many working variants) and is a little bit longer (4,1) 10 moves but i find it easier to use, perhaps because it is what i learnt first so i'm more used to the set-ups.
bmenrigh wrote:
Whoa, that would have landed you in 4th on 1.1.1! You should go back and and challenge Michael's 127 moves...
Why would i want to be 4th when i am 3rd :) or at least i think i will be when the scores update. I just got a 142 move solve. I still think my last layer lets me down, I am usually around 100 moves when i get to the last layer. I use a very basic orient edges, permute edges, orient corners, permute corners all with simple commutators no complex algorithms. That said i do try a few different last layers each solve to find a short one if that makes sense. What are the odds of getting a last layer skip on a megaminx? cause if i got one I'm pretty sure it would be possible to sub 100 :lol:

_________________
Some PBs
3x3x3 :20.7 seconds, 5x5x5 2:33, gigaminx 16:40, 7x7x7 9:48, pyraminx crystal 3:42


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:54 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 12:15 pm
Location: Sandnes, Norway
Elwyn wrote:
E2, C&2, E'2, C, E2, C'&2, E'2, C'or more clearly E2, C&2, E'2, isolates a triangle C, moves said triangle E2, C'&2, E'2, undoes the first part C' undoes the second part 8 moves in total (3,1)
That looked somewhat like a shorter and better version of the way I did it. Thank you so much, this will really cut down my move count.
Elwyn wrote:
Both put together i'm pretty sure that gives you 64 different variants plus all of thier inverses so 128 is that right?
It does sound right, as long as there are 64 different variants. But I don't know if I'm well enough acquainted with those commutators to say that yet, because I'm not completely sure how you wound up with it being 64 variants? Unless you estimated that each single move has 4 variants, which multiplied by 8 gives a total of 32 and then added to the 32 possible variants, estimated the same way, from the right-hand variant? If that's the case, I agree :lol: Either way, this looks like a good algorithm, not that I will be competing for the fewest move record on 1.1.4. I'll leave that up to you :lol:
Elwyn wrote:
What are the odds of getting a last layer skip on a megaminx?
I've solved the Megaminx quite a few times, but never gotten anything near an LL skip. The odds must be a lot lower than on a 3x3. I think I read somewhere that the odds of getting a PLL skip on a 3x3 is 1/72, which would indicate that the LL skip on the Megaminx is rather hard to stumple upon. Though this is just a wild guess, as I unfortunately don't know how to prove it mathematically, but I do believe there is some logic to my assumption.


Last edited by Katja on Tue Jul 06, 2010 12:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Tue Jul 06, 2010 10:00 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 8:54 pm
Location: Bay Area, California
Elwyn wrote:
bmenrigh wrote:
Whoa, that would have landed you in 4th on 1.1.1! You should go back and and challenge Michael's 127 moves...
Why would i want to be 4th when i am 3rd :) or at least i think i will be when the scores update. I just got a 142 move solve. I still think my last layer lets me down, I am usually around 100 moves when i get to the last layer. I use a very basic orient edges, permute edges, orient corners, permute corners all with simple commutators no complex algorithms. That said i do try a few different last layers each solve to find a short one if that makes sense. What are the odds of getting a last layer skip on a megaminx? cause if i got one I'm pretty sure it would be possible to sub 100 :lol:
Sadly, a last layer skip is basically one in a million. Allowing the last layer to be turned freely I count the positions as: (((5 !) / 2) * ((2^5) / 2) * ((5 !) / 2) * ((3^5) / 3)) / 5 = 933120

It sounds like we solve the last layer in the same order and roughly the same way. You might be able to improve your solve by looking up the needed Megaminx OLL and PLL for the one-time solve. I wouldn't think of this as cheating. Skipping the last layer would be a less realistic move count than just using a chart for the last bit of the solve.

Edit: skipping the PLL on a 3x3x3 is 1 in 72 because (((4 !) * (4 !)) / 2) / 4 = 72

_________________
Prior to using my real name I posted under the account named bmenrigh.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Tue Jul 06, 2010 12:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 12:15 pm
Location: Sandnes, Norway
bmenrigh wrote:
Sadly, a last layer skip is basically one in a million. Allowing the last layer to be turned freely I count the positions as: (((5 !) / 2) * ((2^5) / 2) * ((5 !) / 2) * ((3^5) / 3)) / 5 = 933120
No need for me to be able to prove it mathematically when you've got it all under control :lol:

Also, I was wondering, how many applets have you guys solved? I've only solved 12 so far.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Tue Jul 06, 2010 3:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 12:15 pm
Location: Sandnes, Norway
Attachment:
Prosjekt 1.1.5 LØST.jpg
Prosjekt 1.1.5 LØST.jpg [ 68.49 KiB | Viewed 2947 times ]
Solved! I obviously changed my mind about solving 1.1.5 :lol: Next up, 1.1.7.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Tue Jul 06, 2010 8:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 8:41 am
Location: The Blue Mountains, Australia
Katten wrote:
Unless you estimated that each single move has 4 variants, which multiplied by 8 gives a total of 32 and then added to the 32 possible variants, estimated the same way, from the right-hand variant? If that's the case, I agree :lol:
writing the commutator in the form (X Y X') Z (X Y'X') Z' or for simplicity just (X Y X') Z. Z can be 4 different moves at the same time Y can be 4 different moves and X can be 2 (only X2 and X2' work) different moves for the left hand case. so not 4 multiplied by 8 but 4 X 4 X 2 which amounts to the same thing. multiplied in the same way flipping a coin and rolling tow dice gives you 2 x 6 x 6 options, though in that case some of the options are the same because having a 6 on one dice and a 1 on the other is the same as having a 1 on the first dice and a 6 on the other, that doesn't happen in the commutator because X2 and Y is different to X and Y2. Add the 32 from the left hand alg to the 32 from the right hand and you get 64.
Katten wrote:
Also, I was wondering, how many applets have you guys solved? I've only solved 12 so far.
if you click on the score rankings page and scroll to the bottom and look at the puzzles solved you'll see Brandon has solved 152 and i have solved 91 as well as the other people who post in this thread.
bmenrigh wrote:
Sadly, a last layer skip is basically one in a million. Allowing the last layer to be turned freely I count the positions as: (((5 !) / 2) * ((2^5) / 2) * ((5 !) / 2) * ((3^5) / 3)) / 5 = 933120
My guess was going to be around 1/500000 :) i knew it was very unlikely.
bmenrigh wrote:
It sounds like we solve the last layer in the same order and roughly the same way. You might be able to improve your solve by looking up the needed Megaminx OLL and PLL for the one-time solve. I wouldn't think of this as cheating. Skipping the last layer would be a less realistic move count than just using a chart for the last bit of the solve.
I didn't think people even had full oll and pll for megaminx. I prefer to just look around at how placing the last non last layer pieces in a different way affects the last layer. Kind of like ZBLL though i never learnt that. you can then take this further and see if cycling the edges from one spot orients the corners as well or orienting the edges from one point permutes them as well and so on. Try a few spots see which is the best then move onto the next step. It's my human version of a hill climbing alg :lol: .
Edit: Just got a 126 move solve :lol:

_________________
Some PBs
3x3x3 :20.7 seconds, 5x5x5 2:33, gigaminx 16:40, 7x7x7 9:48, pyraminx crystal 3:42


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Wed Jul 07, 2010 3:44 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 12:15 pm
Location: Sandnes, Norway
Elwyn wrote:
Edit: Just got a 126 move solve
Congrats, great job :D Now you're the fewest move record holder :D I'm terrible at fewest moves on the Megaminx. I use >300 moves for one solve. I'll try to at least make it on the record list :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Thu Jul 08, 2010 9:53 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 12:15 pm
Location: Sandnes, Norway
1.1.21 solved. It wasn't exactly as hard as it seemed to be, but still fun. I must admit, before I started to use this applet, I rather disliked dodecahedra, but I think I'm starting to really, really like them :D Haven't gotten around to solving the pentultimate yet, but I will. But as I asked earlier, is it basically a skewb dodecahedra?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Thu Jul 08, 2010 10:28 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 8:54 pm
Location: Bay Area, California
Katten wrote:
1.1.21 solved. It wasn't exactly as hard as it seemed to be, but still fun. I must admit, before I started to use this applet, I rather disliked dodecahedra, but I think I'm starting to really, really like them :D Haven't gotten around to solving the pentultimate yet, but I will. But as I asked earlier, is it basically a skewb dodecahedra?
Good job on 1.1.21, most puzzles turn out to be easier than they look on first inspection.

Regarding the Pentultimate being a Skewb analogue, remember a skewb is corner turning and 1.1.7 is face turning. They are both so deeply cut that turns bisect the puzzle but their simularity mostly ends there. The Skewb Diamond is slightly more similar but I think you'll find 1.1.7 much harder.

I feel that the Pentultimate is the hardest "simple" puzzle there is. It doesn't have many pieces and only two types of pieces. Only one piece has orientations, it can be solved in just a few hundred moves, etc. Michael, Elwyn, and Julian have an insight into it that most others including myself lack.

_________________
Prior to using my real name I posted under the account named bmenrigh.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Thu Jul 08, 2010 10:45 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 8:41 am
Location: The Blue Mountains, Australia
Katten wrote:
But as I asked earlier, is it basically a skewb dodecahedra?
Short answer i'd say no, long answer, depends how you look at it. It looks like a skewb and is deep cut and even the order in which i solve them them is similar but the pentultimate has far more pieces and turns around faces not corners (72 degree turns not 120) and is in general allot harder. On a skewb once you solve the first 4 corners the last 4 are permuted already and are easy to orient... this is not so at all on the pentultimate, those corners are a nightmare until you get used to solving them.

Doug was the first to solve it, he is an incredible solver and it took him over 1000 moves. since then some very efficient methods have been found, the best so far found by Julian (and some incredible luck for that 123 move solve by Julian :) ).

oh Brandon beat me to the answer hahaha.

Bmenrigh wrote:
The skewb diamond is slightly more similar
I think I'd argue against that. Even though it is face turning and deep cut that's about where the similarity stops. Visually the only shape is triangles of which each face has 4 just like the icosimate, and solving wise it is more different and less pieces need orienting than not like the icosimate similar algs to permute said pieces to the icosimate.

Bmenrigh wrote:
It doesn't have many pieces and only two types of pieces. Only one piece has orientations,
The big chop has only one type of piece (and it's mirror image) and none need orienting and yet my brain dies a little every time i turn it. :lol: that said it does have a lot of pieces and can by no means be solved in 123 moves.

_________________
Some PBs
3x3x3 :20.7 seconds, 5x5x5 2:33, gigaminx 16:40, 7x7x7 9:48, pyraminx crystal 3:42


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Thu Jul 08, 2010 1:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 8:54 pm
Location: Bay Area, California
Elwyn wrote:
Bmenrigh wrote:
The skewb diamond is slightly more similar
I think I'd argue against that. Even though it is face turning and deep cut that's about where the similarity stops. Visually the only shape is triangles of which each face has 4 just like the icosimate, and solving wise it is more different and less pieces need orienting than not like the icosimate similar algs to permute said pieces to the icosimate.
I wasn't trying to suggest that the Skewb Diamond was similar to the Pentultimate but just that it was slightly more similar than the Skewb. You make good points though. Neither are good analogues for the Pentultimate so we probably shouldn't worry if one is more similar than the other since neither are very similar to the Pentultimate :)
Elwyn wrote:
Bmenrigh wrote:
It doesn't have many pieces and only two types of pieces. Only one piece has orientations,
The big chop has only one type of piece (and it's mirror image) and none need orienting and yet my brain dies a little every time i turn it. :lol: that said it does have a lot of pieces and can by no means be solved in 123 moves.
Yeah I was posting from a phone so I was overly brief. My descriptions of simplicity weren't intended to suggest that it is actually a simple puzzle but just that looks are deceiving. I don't have a very good intuition for the Pentultimate corners so the sub-200 solves amaze me. When I solved 1.1.7 and 1.1.7b I relied on Julian's guide much more than I would have liked :oops: I used a lot more intuition solving the Pentultimate corners on 1.1.6 but that took me many hours. Of all of the puzzles that can be or have been solved in under 200 moves, the Pentultimate is the hardest for me to grasp. By the numbers though it seems like an easy-ish to solve puzzle. Reality turns out to be another matter!

I agree the Big Chop is evil. But so is 1.2.9 and now that I look at it, it seems more like what the "Skewb Dodecahedron" would be. Hard-looking puzzles are often easy and vice-versa. It's our job to try them and find out which :twisted:

_________________
Prior to using my real name I posted under the account named bmenrigh.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Thu Jul 08, 2010 5:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 12:15 pm
Location: Sandnes, Norway
bmenrigh wrote:
Good job on 1.1.21, most puzzles turn out to be easier than they look on first inspection.
Thanks :D Yeah, it was rather anticlimactic solving a so visually complex puzzle (as you put it) and discovering that it's no challenge at all :lol: But still, easy or not, feels good to have solved it nevertheless.
bmenrigh wrote:
Regarding the Pentultimate being a Skewb analogue, remember a skewb is corner turning and 1.1.7 is face turning. They are both so deeply cut that turns bisect the puzzle but their simularity mostly ends there. The Skewb Diamond is slightly more similar but I think you'll find 1.1.7 much harder.
Thanks for clarifying that. I am kind off embarrassed that I didn't consider the fact that the Skewb obviously isn't face-turning before I asked that :oops:

I have given the pentultimate a few twists now, and so far I've only managed to complete one face. Looks can be definitely be deceiving. This puzzle looks like it would be super easy, just like 1.1.21 looks like it will be a pain to solve. Neither is correct by any means :lol: But which of 1.1.6 and 1.1.7 should I go about solving first?

Also, 1.1.20 looks indescribably hard, is that by any chance on of the puzzles that are the complete opposite in difficulty than it looks? I sure hope so.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Thu Jul 08, 2010 7:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 8:54 pm
Location: Bay Area, California
Katten wrote:
bmenrigh wrote:
Good job on 1.1.21, most puzzles turn out to be easier than they look on first inspection.
Thanks :D Yeah, it was rather anticlimactic solving a so visually complex puzzle (as you put it) and discovering that it's no challenge at all :lol: But still, easy or not, feels good to have solved it nevertheless.
It's the "high" of solving a puzzle that keeps me coming back :wink:
Katten wrote:
bmenrigh wrote:
Regarding the Pentultimate being a Skewb analogue, remember a skewb is corner turning and 1.1.7 is face turning. They are both so deeply cut that turns bisect the puzzle but their simularity mostly ends there. The Skewb Diamond is slightly more similar but I think you'll find 1.1.7 much harder.
Thanks for clarifying that. I am kind off embarrassed that I didn't consider the fact that the Skewb obviously isn't face-turning before I asked that :oops:
It isn't every day you see deep cut puzzle like 1.1.7 so it's easy to jump to that sort of conclusion. When I first saw it I thought it was the dodecahedral analogue of the Skewb Diamond and tried solving it as such for about an hour before I realized I was going down the wrong path.
Katten wrote:
I have given the pentultimate a few twists now, and so far I've only managed to complete one face. Looks can be definitely be deceiving. This puzzle looks like it would be super easy, just like 1.1.21 looks like it will be a pain to solve. Neither is correct by any means :lol: But which of 1.1.6 and 1.1.7 should I go about solving first?
Don't attempt 1.1.6 until you can solve 1.1.7 :lol: 1.1.6 is the "master" version of 1.1.7. If you haven't noticed yet, the centers on 1.1.4, 1.1.5, 1.1.6, and 1.1.7 are all the same. The corners of 1.1.6 and 1.1.7 are the same which means 1.1.6 has two extra piece types.
Katten wrote:
Also, 1.1.20 looks indescribably hard, is that by any chance on of the puzzles that are the complete opposite in difficulty than it looks? I sure hope so.
It's not that bad at all. The only "innovation" you need to solve is is pairing up two small edge pieces to make one paired edge piece.

The routine I came up with was a commutated commutator where the first commutator was (1,1), slice moves only, and the second part was a single face turn. That is: ((slice, slice), face). I was quite pleased with the routine. It applies to 1.1.18 and 1.1.14 too.

Once you have those edges paired it's a simple matter of placing each half of the 1.1.4/1.1.5 inner triangle pieces (the trapezoid and triangle) and then placing the inner diamond pieces. You'll probably beat my time :( .

For fewest moves I suggest:

1) Without commutators pair as many center trapezoids with their triangles as possible to form virtual 1.1.5 triangles.
2) Pair edge pieces ((1,1),1)
3) Solve centers trying not to break too many (or any) 1.1.5 triangle pairs
4) Pair up any really easy diamonds with their paired edges to form virtual 1.1.5 edges (3,1)
5) Solve reduced 1.1.5 ignoring that some 1.1.5 pieces aren't fully formed, opportunistically fixing some 1.1.5 triangle pairs and opportunistically fixing any easy diamonds
6) Cycle the last few diamonds into place
7) Cycle last few trapazoids and triangles into place

Julian, if your still around, can you comment on the above solving order?

_________________
Prior to using my real name I posted under the account named bmenrigh.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Fri Jul 09, 2010 12:09 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 8:41 am
Location: The Blue Mountains, Australia
bmenrigh wrote:
But so is 1.2.9 and now that I look at it, it seems more like what the "Skewb Dodecahedron" would be.
That's the way i see it because if you bandage that puzzle you can actually turn it into a skewb ultimate so it really is a skewb with extra turns.
Katten wrote:
Also, 1.1.20 looks indescribably hard, is that by any chance on of the puzzles that are the complete opposite in difficulty than it looks? I sure hope so.
As Brandon said it shouldn't be too hard but it will take a long time and a lot of moves. It's hard to define what makes a puzzle hard, I know exactly how to solve 1.1.32/33 but i haven't just because i know putting my solution into practice will be very time consuming and a little bit difficult. Is a puzzle difficult if you can find a solution easily but putting it into practice is hard? Or if finding a solution is hard but once found the puzzle is easy?
bmenrigh wrote:
When I solved 1.1.7 and 1.1.7b I relied on Julian's guide much more than I would have liked
I only ever use 1 (6,1) commutator for pentultimate corners i just use a lot of set up moves and i don't think that affects the move count very much. what lets me down is i also only use 1 (1,1) 2-2 swap for the centres which disturbs some of the 10 corners in the lower half of the puzzle so i can't solve as many of them before the last centres as Julian can. Though i too use Julian's guide for orienting the last 6 super pentultimate centres.

_________________
Some PBs
3x3x3 :20.7 seconds, 5x5x5 2:33, gigaminx 16:40, 7x7x7 9:48, pyraminx crystal 3:42


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Fri Jul 09, 2010 12:29 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 8:41 am
Location: The Blue Mountains, Australia
In regards to 1.1.20
bmenrigh wrote:
Julian, if your still around, can you comment on the above solving order?
I'm not Julian but i'd like to reply anyway :) I myself would solve quite differently and i don't understand some of your steps... like step 3, why are you doing that so early? I would go for complete reduction to 1.1.5
1 reduce edge pairs at first with intuition then in 5 moves Slice then 3 face moves then undo slice
2 triangles a different slice then three face moves undo slice
3 diamonds as many as i can with just an all slice (1,1) then I'd have to resort to a (3,1)
For all those steps undoing set-up moves in unnecessary.
4 solve 1.1.5. Though i would possibly cry if i got the edge parity right at the end so I'd probably check for that after step 1 :lol:
I'm unsure of how good this would be but i'm almost certain it would easily beat the current record.

ohhh i just realised solving the reduced triangles will take an extra 2 moves making each cycle (3,2) and 10 moves how annoying.

Edit:changed a few things including step 1 and 2 can both be done in 5 moves not 6

_________________
Some PBs
3x3x3 :20.7 seconds, 5x5x5 2:33, gigaminx 16:40, 7x7x7 9:48, pyraminx crystal 3:42


Last edited by Elwyn on Fri Jul 09, 2010 4:05 am, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Fri Jul 09, 2010 3:06 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 8:54 pm
Location: Bay Area, California
Elwyn wrote:
In regards to 1.1.20
bmenrigh wrote:
Julian, if your still around, can you comment on the above solving order?
I'm not Julian but i'd like to reply anyway :) I myself would solve quite differently and i don't understand some of your steps... like step 3, why are you doing that so early? I would go for complete reduction to 1.1.5
1 reduce edge pairs at first with intuition then in 6 moves Slice then (1,1) then undo slice
2 triangles a different slice (1,1) slice
3 diamonds as many as i can with just an all slice (1,1) then I'd have to resort to a (3,1)
4 solve 1.1.5. Though i would possibly cry if i got the edge parity right at the end so I'd probably check for that after step 1 :lol:
I'm unsure of how good this would be but i'm almost certain it would easily beat the current record.

ohhh i just realised solving the reduced triangles will take an extra 2 moves each cycle how annoying.
Of course, It's always good to hear your ideas! As usual you make me look like a novice...

I think your idea of pairing edges via intuition rather than pairing the small triangle with trapezoid is a better idea. I was thinking cycling the 1.1.5 triangles around would be the most expensive part of the solve but you're probably more efficient to use intuition pairing edges rather than pairing triangles.

I thought about the order for about 10 minutes and I moved the centers step all around in the solve order. I don't have a nice pure center cycle (I'm sure there is a short one, I just haven't looked) and since my center cycle moves the 1.1.5 triangles a bit I thought it would be better to place the centers before you start placing the paired triangles. I agree though that the centers can be done almost at any point in the solve.

I forgot about edge parity... You're right, that should be checked for and then undo back to the finish of pairing and possibly fix parity. The parity fix would probably take 20 moves or so.

1.1.20 is big and tedious but I sure hope you solve it and get a record!

_________________
Prior to using my real name I posted under the account named bmenrigh.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread
PostPosted: Fri Jul 09, 2010 4:06 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 12:15 pm
Location: Sandnes, Norway
bmenrigh wrote:
It's the "high" of solving a puzzle that keeps me coming back
I feel the same way. I love the feeling of accomplishment I get when I finish a puzzle, especially when I had trouble solving it. Makes me feel smart :lol:
bmenrigh wrote:
Don't attempt 1.1.6 until you can solve 1.1.7 1.1.6 is the "master" version of 1.1.7. If you haven't noticed yet, the centers on 1.1.4, 1.1.5, 1.1.6, and 1.1.7 are all the same. The corners of 1.1.6 and 1.1.7 are the same which means 1.1.6 has two extra piece types.
I'm quite surprised that my lack of better inspection on some of the puzzles still don't keep me from solving them :lol: Thanks again, for clarifying things. I take comport in the fact that you guys are pros at this (at least in my opinion), and I'm still somewhat new to this. Also I hope that my continues questions won't always be so obvious :lol: I only ask to get a better understanding, seeing as you have a lot more experience than I do.
bmenrigh wrote:
You'll probably beat my time .
I don't know about that. I usually spend a lot of time solving something new. As you might have seen, my solve of 1.1.4 almost took 4 hours :oops:
Elwyn wrote:
It's hard to define what makes a puzzle hard
For me it's the general feeling of confusion that separates them from moderate to hard. Meaning, when I encounter something completely new and absolutely have no idea how to solve it, as I have no use for any previous puzzle solving knowledge. Kinda like the first feeling I got trying to solve 1.1.4, except the fact that I could use both Megaminx and Pyramix Crystal knowledge to solve it.
Elwyn wrote:
I would go for complete reduction to 1.1.5
This was my first instinct as well. I would solve it something like this:
1. Pair edges
2. Place edges onto their correct face, like on a Pyraminx Crystal
3. Reduce centers
4. Place the center triangles like on 1.1.5
5. Place diamonds - not quite sure how I would do that yet
6. Solve the rest like 1.1.5
Or would that be completely backwards? This is however my first thoughts on how I would solve it. I might give it a try soon-ish, I'm still not completely awake, so I might wait until I am.
bmenrigh wrote:
I forgot about edge parity... You're right, that should be checked for and then undo back to the finish of pairing and possibly fix parity.
I will definitely be checking for parity before I move on to the centers. Parity is not my friend!


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3096 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39 ... 62  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

Forum powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group