once you have the macros to turn the faces, simply run that macro with some
random parameters about 1000 times to shuffle the cube and keep it solvable. I
agree that it would be easier to grab a real cube, scramble it, and plot out
the moves to solve it. That's quite easily done. Does anyone remeber how to
solve the cube?
Joshua


Axel Hecht wrote:
> 
> Ken wrote:
> >
> > RED-Cow wrote:
> > >
> > > I got bored the other day and decided to make one of these.  I'm
> > > wondering if Moray's Inverse Kinematics could be used to make it so the
> > > sides are rotatable.  That would be cool.
> >
> >   From what I understand about inverse kinematics this would probably
> > be a poor application of it's abilities. All you really need to do is
> > declare a group of nine cubes on one face in a union and then rotate
> > it around it's own axis.
> >
> >  A little random color distribution from that shown would at least
> > seperate yours from the dozen or so I have seen all displayed in a
> > solved state of rest.
> >
> >   To get it really mixed up i.e. to make it usable is not something I
> > think would be worth the effort. Might make for a really challenging
> > animation project. Write a routine that randomly mixes up the cube and
> > the remainder of the animation pov spends trying to solve it. Might be
> > possible but way beyond anything I would like to try.
> >
> 
> Well posed hell :-)
> Two remarks, firstly, not every random order of boxes is solveble! I know a very bad
move towards
> others trying to solve your cube, just by twisting one box. No way to ever make it.
So you have to
> be really careful to choose or construct a possible order. But then of course one
can implement the
> solver, that was there at the time. I used to have it in print, but surfing may
yield to a faster
> solution.
> 
> Axel
> 
> PS: I think the spaces between the colored patches are just a bit to wide.

Post a reply to this message