Message #1083

From: Anthony Deschamps <anthony.j.deschamps@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [MC4D] edge algorithms
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 23:13:11 -0400

As you move into higher dimensions, your algorithms will become a lot
longer, but they’re still based on the same concepts. If you write some
macros and use those to build more complex macros, then most problems become
a matter of a few set up moves, applying the macro, and then those set up
moves in reverse. Don’t worry, the transition from 4D to 5D is much easier
than the transition from 3D to 4D.

On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 7:07 PM, deustfrr <deustfrr@yahoo.ca> wrote:

>
>
> Yes! I found out how to do it. Although I’m worried about
> larger/higher-dimensional puzzles because the solution to this problem
> itself took about 150 moves!
>
>
> — In 4D_Cubing@yahoogroups.com <4D_Cubing%40yahoogroups.com>, Chris
> Locke <project.eutopia@…> wrote:
> >
> > I don’t want to be the one to say this, but you can’t expect us to walk
> you
> > through every step in a solve. Play around with it, try out all kinds of
> > commutators and/or conjugates, use macros you used for fixing faces, take
> a
> > break, and try again later. You should realize that the algorithm for
> > solving 3D edges is not going to work on the 4D edges, because 4D edges
> are
> > made of 3c pieces, not 2c. Using 3D methods, one should be able to fix
> > centers and faces of a 4D cube with a little refinement, but edges
> require
> > something more. If we just gave you macros for fixing the edges, then
> we’d
> > basically be solving it for you at this stage.
> >
> > 2010/7/25 deustfrr <deustfrr@…>
>
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Does anybody know how to do algorithms for edges without affecting the
> > > faces? you can do d R F’ R’ F d’ on a 4X4X4 and swap two edges, but you
> > > can’t do the same thing on 4^4 without swapping 2 more edges and 2
> faces.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>