Message #2287

From: Jacob <>
Subject: Re: [MC4D] Re: New Solution Page: 2 Layer Simplex
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 17:29:35 -0700

Thanks for the feedback and I’m glad you understood it well. Actually you would be right about the two move twists. Before now, I had never had more than 2 separate 2 move twists in any solve, and never more than 1 if every piece was scrambled, so I assumed that was a pattern like with edges and corners on the Rubik’s cube. I actually just had one that needed 8, and it was kinda confusing until I went back and noticed that I had 3 separate 2 twists while every piece was scrambled. The advice about the pyraminx is very smart, but I don’t own one. I’ll have to make one on UMC and take a screen shot later. For now, I’ll go make that quick text edit and change the title. (I forgot what I had called it before when I made the page, then forgot to change it when I remembered   XD)
Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please.
-Mark Twain

From: schuma <>
Sent: Friday, June 22, 2012 7:19 PM
Subject: [MC4D] Re: New Solution Page: 2 Layer Simplex


Hi Jacob,

I think you did a good job explaining the method clearly. I have the following comments, nothing serious.

(1) You said: "using the following method, you can consistently solve this puzzle in 6 moves or less." I don’t agree. There are five pieces to be solved. When the four stickers of a piece are in two 2-swap position, according to the paragraph starting with "If only two pieces match…" this piece requires two moves. So the total number of moves is ten, in the worst case. Is it right? Since the probability that a certain piece is in such a position is 1/4, the probability of this worst case is 1/4^5 ~ one thousandth. But it will occur.

(2) The title of the wiki page is "Simplex 2^4". I like "2 layer simplex" better, as in the title of this post. "2^4" makes me think of 2x2x2x2 immediately, so seems to be misleading.

(3) It would be good if you could mention the 3D analog of this puzzle: Pyraminx scrambled by only twisting the trivial tips. People will have an idea about what kind of task they are facing.


— In, Melinda Green <melinda@…> wrote:
> I’ve worked through Jacob’s solution and was successful so it is
> certainly easy and useful, especially for beginners. It may even be
> useful for handling the corners of the 3-simplex and higher. Do check it
> out.
> -Melinda
> On 6/21/2012 10:45 PM, Jacob wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > Hey guys. I just wanted to get the news out about the new page so if
> > anyone has trouble solving this puzzle or would like to solve it in
> > less moves, they could benefit from it. It’s not very polished up yet,
> > but I don’t have much time to work on it right now (I’m getting ready
> > to leave town for essentially the rest of the summer and may not get a
> > chance while I’m gone). It may be a little vague in some spots, but I
> > explained it to the best of my abilities for now. When I get
> > screenshots and a flowchart of the method up, it should be
> > a much easier to follow guide, but I won’t have that chance, in all
> > likelyness, until late July. Let me know if there’s any questions
> > about the method that I can clarify, and any general feedback at all
> > would be apreciated.