Message #2823

Subject: RE: Re: [MC4D] RE: New puzzles
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2013 11:48:06 -0800

I think, it’s better to add new puzzles with additional identifications on vertex- and edge-centered twists. Because they are really different puzzles, and some of them may be much more difficult than old ones.
I’m looking at {8,4} 9 colors, and can’t understand it. In face-centered puzzle it works like non-oriented non-uniform puzzle with some two-side edges. In vertex-centered variant some vertices of the same structure are identified, but sometimes there is only half of them… and the identified ones don’t all have the same orientation.
Is it possible to add identification with "in place reflection" and "end rotation", but without extra rotations?


—In, <roice3@…> wrote:

Hi Andrey,

Thanks for your observation about this. To get the "mathematically pure" behavior you are wanting, we can add an additional identification to each of these puzzles, one that is a rotation only (no reflections). We can effectively get that by marking EdgeSet 0, and using the appropriate EndRotation… 4 for {8,3} and 5 for {10,3}.

Because of the solutions listed in the table, there is the question of whether to edit the existing puzzles or add new ones. The existing definitions are valid configurations too, just with a different topology. But they are similar enough that I’m thinking we wouldn’t want separate definitions with only this difference.

If it is ok with you and others, I will just change the behavior of the existing puzzles and not worry about the table, but if anyone disagrees please let me know. I’ll push the change out at the same time as the addition of all the new colorings you’ve been making.

Thanks again,

On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 3:22 PM, <andreyastrelin@… mailto:andreyastrelin@…> wrote:

something is wrong with {10,3} 6C edge-rotated puzzles. When I select some edge, I expect that edges on opposite sides of its decagons will be selected too (because mathematically they are the same). But that edges remain non-selected. Same is true for vertex-rotated 6C, and also for {10,3} 12color.
Is there something missing in puzzle description?

I see the same in {8,3} 6C… and I don’t like it because there are solutions of these puzzles in the table (including some of my own ones)… Looks like we solved puzzles that are not as "mathematically pure" as they should be.

—In, <andreyastrelin@…> wrote:

{7,3} F0.4:0:1 F0.8:0:1 puzzle solved!
It is hyperbolic equivalent of "gigaminx" - there are two layers of rotation at each face. Method of solving is almost the same: I start with "subedge" 1-color pieces, then combine pieces at each edge, solve puzzle like classic Klein Quadric and at last put "subcorners" to correct place. Most problems are with the second stage - there are 84 edges, and it’s very difficult to find parts of the same edge. I did it by collecting all edge parts with some color around one center and working with them (nice feeling - when you can freely rotate almost all faces and know that you will not spoil anything by that).
Total twist count - 7558. Maximal operation length - 24 (for rotating 3 corners on the third stage), other operations are not longer than 8 twists.


—In, <roice3@…> wrote:

Yeah, awesome!

Looks like another crystal cube order may be happening :D

(sent from my phone)

On Nov 17, 2013, at 1:57 AM, Melinda Green <melinda@… mailto:melinda@…> wrote:


On 11/16/2013 7:02 PM, andreyastrelin@… mailto:andreyastrelin@… wrote:

100 puzzles solved :)


—In, <andreyastrelin@…> mailto:andreyastrelin@… wrote:

{10,3} 18C F0.67:0:1 solved. 2680 twists.
It was easy enough (if you know how to handle pieces with wrong orientation).


—In, <ed.baumann@…> mailto:ed.baumann@… wrote:

I’am playing with MT hyp {10,3],18C F0:0:1(not F1:0:0). 300 twists for 4 of the 18 colors so far. I don’t care for the number of twists and use 3 cycles all the way even early in order to not disturb anything. I also complete colors before starting a new one. So this puzzle is not so hard to solve but funny.

I will complete wiki for the 60 new puzzles and effectively aim for the new 50%.


—– Original Message —–
From: andreyastrelin@… mailto:andreyastrelin@…
Sent: Saturday, November 16, 2013 4:02 AM
Subject: RE: Re: [MC4D] New puzzles

May be, but in 120-Cell you have some search tools. In 36-color tiles there is many similar colors that makes difficult searching of the correct tile (even when you make one face white and all others dark). Pieces of F1:0:0 are very thin, most of them are close to boundary, so you don’t even see them all.
Topology of {10,3}, 36C is not very easy (actually, I don’t understand it at all). When I look for the tile, I’m not always sure that my search covers whole fundamental area, so I can go over the same part again and again. And there are problems with finding a way for tiles that doesn’t disturb already solved parts.


—In, <melinda@…> mailto:melinda@… wrote:

What about it is difficult? I would guess that more colors makes it more tedious but not harder, similar to 3^4 versus 120-Cell.

On 11/15/2013 1:44 PM, andreyastrelin@… mailto:andreyastrelin@… wrote:

I’ve solved {10,3}, 36C, F:0:0:1. It was difficult - it has too many colors. Total count is 2518 twists.