Yeah, yeah I know, I cheated, but still, it's functionnal ! Hell it's even more functionnal than a regular 1x2x111

Okay so here's the thing, I made an extensible 1x2xN just to beat my own 2x2x50 because why not, so here it is

I'll let you see the pictures, it's theoretically 1665mm long but a big longer due to excess powder ! And for the other dimensions, it's just 15x30mm

So yeah, I'll let you check out the pictures, I can't really describe this haha

Video

Greg

Greg that last photo of yours is absurd. This puzzle is truly worthy of the “over the top” title. Well done!

First the 33x33x33, then the 2x2x50, now the 1x2x111. What's next, a 1x1x500?
Anyway, cool puzzle!

Awesome and crazy...
T’es un ouf mec !

What the.. How did yo..

Just incredibly mad and useless, I love it.

Y'know, when I saw one leg of the puzzle droop down at 0:20, I was instantly reminded of chromosomes under the microscope.

I love these impressive albeit silly world records!

kequals wrote:First the 33x33x33, then the 2x2x50, now the 1x2x111. What's next, a 1x1x500?
Anyway, cool puzzle!

Next one may be a 1x1/0. You know, divide by zero is infinity

Oskar

Amazing scrambling technique!

Now someone must make an inter-puzzle piece exchange between different twisty puzzles!




Pantazis

Yes, just yes.

Since this is totally functional, I don't think this is cheating. And this is the funniest twistypuzzle video I've watched recently!

That's awesome. Do you mind if I reverse-engineer the design and put it on Thingiverse? Unless you're planning on selling the puzzle

Ridiculously awesome.

Krystian

otischeng wrote:Since this is totally functional, I don't think this is cheating. And this is the funniest twistypuzzle video I've watched recently!

Agreed. More of a clever trick to achieve the unachievable.

If this is considered a scam it is the best one I have seen.
Well done.
Could you add some images of singular pieces in order to demonstrate what you have done?
Andreas

Since some talk has been about its stability and robustness, I would take the movement of this puzzle
any day, when compared to the movement of other mass produced puzzles, e.g. the chinaminxes.

Moreover, the flexibility of Greg's puzzle introduces that crazy interchange between literally different
type of pieces, which is not seen very often. I dare to compare its uniqueness to the change of different
types of pieces of the 3x3x3 mixup cube.



Pantazis

I love how you can get it out of alignment and it still functions and makes it more difficult! I never would have thought to do that.

Edit: I was just thinking, would this special move be considered fudging, or would it be an all new sort of movement?

-d

darryl wrote:I love how you can get it out of alignment and it still functions and makes it more difficult! I never would have thought to do that.

Edit: I was just thinking, would this special move be considered fudging, or would it be an all new sort of movement?

-d

I'm pretty sure this is altogether a new way of turning

If you guys have any ideas for more excessive stuff, I'll take it, I'm having fun with the world record series

darryl wrote:I was just thinking, would this special move be considered fudging, or would it be an all new sort of movement?

-d

I would call it either "transporting" or "beaming up" (definitely not fudging).




Pantazis

Grégoire Pfennig wrote:I'm having fun with the world record series

It's very addictive.

kastellorizo wrote:

darryl wrote:I was just thinking, would this special move be considered fudging, or would it be an all new sort of movement?

-d

I would call it either "transporting" or "beaming up" (definitely not fudging).

I think it's bending space and time. It's similar to how TV programs try to explain worm holes in a dumbed down way. They typically have a sheet of paper representing space that they fold and stick a pencil through.

Tony Fisher wrote:

kastellorizo wrote:I would call it either "transporting" or "beaming up" (definitely not fudging).

I think it's bending space and time. It's similar to how TV programs try to explain worm holes in a dumbed down way. They typically have a sheet of paper representing space that they fold and stick a pencil through.

This is very true! Maybe it's a hint on how we could construct designs such as the 4D 3x3x3?

Hmmm....



Pantazis

I may have forgotten this ! Also, yes Andreas, to answer your PM you can name it the 1x2xN

kastellorizo wrote:This is very true! Maybe it's a hint on how we could construct designs such as the 4D 3x3x3?
Pantazis

Would that not be a 3x3x3x3?

I want to see a compatible 1x2x2 core (kernel?) before this gets called a 1x2xN

1x2x(2N+1) until then.

JALAJ wrote:

kastellorizo wrote:This is very true! Maybe it's a hint on how we could construct designs such as the 4D 3x3x3?
Pantazis

Would that not be a 3x3x3x3?

Ooops sorry! The spacial part of our 3D world bounded my brain (temporarily) stopping me to place
the extra x3.

Aaaah... those.... projections!




Pantazis

^Hey, at least you have the excuse of being a 3-dimensional being trying to think about 4-dimensional objects. The people who constantly call a 3*3*3 just a 3*3 don't have such an excuse, even if most sighted people often neglect to think about what is above or below them when taking in their surroundings.

Grégoire Pfennig wrote:I may have forgotten this ! Also, yes Andreas, to answer your PM you can name it the 1x2xN

Thank you.