Talk:How to Solve the Rubik's Cube

From Wikibooks, the open-content textbooks collection

Contents 1 How to solve any NxNxN cube 2 Transwiki log 3 Neglects to mention easiest method of "solving" (which isn't really solving at all) 4 Rotating the center faces 5 Pictures! 6 Clean up the description 7 2 vs. 2 8 Copyvio? 9 White-other color? 10 UB'R2D'U'RU2BR'B2L2 is gibberish to a beginner. 11 Pictures in notation 12 Notation? 13 Step 2 is incomplete 14 This book needs to be rewritten 15 Step 5: Position corner pieces

[edit] How to solve any NxNxN cube

Eeep, this solution is essentially the same as the one found at jeays.net/rubiks, and it gives a second solution, also by David Singmaster.--64.230.50.205 01:03, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Don't merge. It would only confuse beginners on the subject of how to solve a Rubik's Cube, and they are most likely going to be the most frequest visitors to this page. And it seems that half the people who want to merge the articles aren't giving any reason as to why it would be better, either.

Don't merge. This article should contain a link at its end to the general NxNxN cube, but these are separate topics that should have seperate entries. 68.162.100.40 03:59, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Definitely merge! -Mydotnet 02:16, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

Merge. --Ryan524 02:25, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Eh. Merge it. It makes more sense as an extension of this book anyway. How does one go about merging a book? Do administrators do it, or do authors? -- unknown

My advice. Dont merge it unless by merge you mean append as separate section. This solution is 'easy' to follow. The general solution of nxnxn is harder to follow and even harder for some people to see how to apply it to say a 2x2x2. The third book missing, (not yet started) is one that details how to solve such puzzles in general using the principles of conjugation... That method solves dodecahedral 'cubes' and a number of other variants that do not fit nxnxn. It solves whole classes of rearrange the bits puzzles where a move always move N pieces. Eg Olympic ring shaped grooves with coloured balls rolling around in them...

In fact it also solves 3x3x3x3 but that gets spooky... 202.164.205.96 15:10, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Don't merge. This book is a self-proclaimed inefficient but intuitive introduction to solving the cube for beginners. NxNxN is great for completeness but it is not intuitive or in any way easy for beginners. Beginners need all the clarity they can get. The fewer new concepts they have to learn the better. Adding NxNxN would create an immediate and unnecessary order of complexity. As a recent beginner I can garauntee you that if this page had been muddled with NxNxN strategies, I wouldn't have read it. Credford 17:59, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Merge! It should be used as a reference to other users if they want to find out more about it. 3857wiki 20:01, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Don't merge. Lots of beginners (incl. me) turn to the 3*3 cube wikibook for simple, specific instructions. Merging will effectively render the 3*3 page useless for beginners, while not making the general solution any more useful for technically accomplished cubers. There's no upside. A link from the 3*3 solution to to the generalized solution is in order, but that's all. 207.6.31.6 21:09, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Can we reach a consensus on this? There seems to be no good reason to merge and lots of good reasons not to. Should I remove the merge suggestion from the Rubik's Cube article? 207.6.31.6 05:49, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I see your point.

[1]

I say dont merge because it will just really mess up beginners-- nobody you need to know of

Don't merge This is a specific article on how to solve the 3x3 cube. Also, the other page's instructions are harder to understand.

Rewrite the NxNxN article Looking at the NXNXN article, it really almost exclusively focuses on 3X3X3 and only mentions 2X2X2 to state the obvious. (e.g. if you can solve a 3X3X3; the same thing works for 2X2X2). It's 3X3X3 method is different than this one so it would be rather difficult to merge that one in here without removing much of this. So I think what should happen is on the NxNxN article should be changed to really become how to solve what the article title says. 173.21.255.175 (talk) 21:48, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Transwiki log

Transwiki from Wikipedia:How to solve the Rubik's Cube

(cur) (last)  04:26, 25 June 2005 24.118.220.84 (rv vandalism -- someone removed step 2)
(cur) (last)  02:03, 16 June 2005 TheGrappler (Category:Rubik's Cube)
(cur) (last)  22:18, 5 June 2005 Grika m (Added link for scores)
(cur) (last)  02:51, 5 June 2005 65.199.17.194 (→Other things)
(cur) (last)  02:50, 5 June 2005 65.199.17.194 (→Step 2: U face corner pieces)
(cur) (last)  00:41, 20 May 2005 216.93.93.134 (Moved a sentence for clarity)
(cur) (last)  01:48, 13 May 2005 Grika (Changed rectoid to cuboid (which is actually a word))
(cur) (last)  03:40, 12 May 2005 Freyr (rv revert)
(cur) (last)  03:39, 12 May 2005 71.104.225.179 (→Step 2: U face corner pieces)
(cur) (last)  15:09, 3 May 2005 Kbdank71 (rv vandalism)
(cur) (last)  15:07, 3 May 2005 205.160.53.142
(cur) (last)  21:50, 28 April 2005 Grika (→Alternative method)
(cur) (last)  02:15, 28 April 2005 Grika (Removed humor (see the discussion) and added a real method)
(cur) (last)  18:39, 27 April 2005 62.255.64.9 (rv. not vandalism)
(cur) (last)  22:25, 26 April 2005 Pavel Vozenilek m (rv vandal)
(cur) (last)  17:23, 26 April 2005 62.255.64.9 (rv. it was good, add your method too)
(cur) (last)  18:43, 25 April 2005 Pavel Vozenilek m (rv - not relevant (and I know even faster method - break the cube into pieces and put it together as you like))
(cur) (last)  18:13, 25 April 2005 62.255.64.9 (alternative method)
(cur) (last)  14:45, 9 April 2005 Rje m (→Step 1: Top edge pieces - sp)
(cur) (last)  11:30, 28 March 2005 67.170.254.26
(cur) (last)  12:01, 15 March 2005 Ahoerstemeier m (Reverted edits by 202.162.57.81 to last version by Plek)
(cur) (last)  08:07, 15 March 2005 202.162.57.81 (→Step 4: Solve remaining edge pieces)
(cur) (last)  20:49, 18 January 2005 Plek m (rv vandalism by 199.219.144.50)
(cur) (last)  20:42, 18 January 2005 199.219.144.50
(cur) (last)  20:42, 18 January 2005 199.219.144.50 (→Background)
(cur) (last)  16:38, 17 January 2005 69.195.36.86 (→Step 6: Orient corner pieces correctly - clarify)
(cur) (last)  23:27, 2 January 2005 142.51.44.188 (→Other terms)
(cur) (last)  23:26, 2 January 2005 142.51.44.188 (→Other terms)
(cur) (last)  23:38, 29 December 2004 69.195.36.86 (→External links - page moved)
(cur) (last)  22:13, 28 December 2004 Michael Hardy m (→External Links)
(cur) (last)  11:24, 11 December 2004 Sam Hocevar m (fix double word)
(cur) (last)  02:40, 13 November 2004 165.247.65.163 (→Step 2: U face corner pieces)
(cur) (last)  02:38, 13 November 2004 165.247.65.163 (→Step 2: U face corner pieces)
(cur) (last)  14:14, 12 November 2004 Secfan m (→See also - simplification)
(cur) (last)  23:55, 7 November 2004 69.110.61.187 (change link title)
(cur) (last)  22:56, 7 November 2004 69.110.61.187 (Add Solution Link)
(cur) (last)  18:02, 19 October 2004 DavidCary
(cur) (last)  16:47, 18 October 2004 Eric119 m
(cur) (last)  15:11, 12 October 2004 ZeroOne m (categories)
(cur) (last)  21:56, 11 October 2004 199.244.214.30 (→External Links)
(cur) (last)  00:01, 29 September 2004 81.178.80.232 (→Step 1: Top edge pieces)
(cur) (last)  23:59, 28 September 2004 81.178.80.232 (→Step 1: Top edge pieces)
(cur) (last)  04:16, 24 September 2004 Offsky m (→External Links)
(cur) (last)  15:24, 19 September 2004 Guanabot m (Guanaco - robot: converting HTML tags to proper wiki markup and removing excess newlines)
(cur) (last)  22:20, 17 September 2004 Grunt m (Reverted edits by 66.147.14.133 to last version by 68.33.244.206)
(cur) (last)  22:19, 17 September 2004 66.147.14.133 (→Step 2: U face corner pieces)
(cur) (last)  22:18, 17 September 2004 66.147.14.133 (→Step 2: U face corner pieces)
(cur) (last)  13:51, 24 August 2004 68.33.244.206 (→External Links)
(cur) (last)  22:55, 20 August 2004 ZeroOne m (the article is called "How to solve the Rubik's Cube". that spoiler-warning really insulted everybody's intelligence. removed.)
(cur) (last)  02:58, 30 July 2004 Ardonik (fix external link, howto)
(cur) (last)  02:52, 30 July 2004 Ardonik (Put {{spoiler}} at top, improve intro msg)
(cur) (last)  02:50, 30 July 2004 Ardonik m (Revert unnecessary equals sign by 81.202.143.180 to last version by Jtmendes)
(cur) (last)  02:38, 30 July 2004 81.202.143.180 (→Step 2: U face corner pieces)
(cur) (last)  04:34, 22 June 2004 Jtmendes (→External Links)
(cur) (last)  04:29, 22 June 2004 Jtmendes
(cur) (last)  18:20, 20 June 2004 69.10.98.175 (→Background)
(cur) (last)  17:33, 20 June 2004 69.10.98.175 (→Step 2: U face corner pieces)
(cur) (last)  17:32, 20 June 2004 69.10.98.175 (→Step 2: U face corner pieces)
(cur) (last)  19:30, 15 June 2004 ALoan m (wikify ²)
(cur) (last)  07:49, 4 June 2004 Template namespace initialisation script
(cur) (last)  22:25, 29 May 2004 200.218.180.254
(cur) (last)  21:57, 18 April 2004 Bryan Derksen m (formatting)
(cur) (last)  21:22, 16 April 2004 4.250.87.156 (Spoiler Warning)
(cur) (last)  21:35, 27 February 2004 Charles Matthews m (Reverted edits by 24.100.129.127 to last version by Maximus Rex)
(cur) (last)  21:34, 27 February 2004 24.100.129.127
(cur) (last)  00:47, 7 February 2004 Maximus Rex m (Reverted edits by 68.230.50.245 to last version by 213.231.204.211)
(cur) (last)  00:47, 7 February 2004 68.230.50.245
(cur) (last)  00:46, 7 February 2004 68.230.50.245
(cur) (last)  22:47, 10 January 2004 213.231.204.211 (revert)
(cur) (last)  22:37, 10 January 2004 66.157.117.229
(cur) (last)  21:09, 18 December 2003 Morwen m (Reverted to last edit by Arpingstone)
(cur) (last)  21:08, 18 December 2003 24.90.150.127
(cur) (last)  16:22, 7 November 2003 Arpingstone m
(cur) (last)  11:58, 7 November 2003 Arpingstone (More "you" removed)
(cur) (last)  11:51, 7 November 2003 Arpingstone (Sorry, I messed up, this is the article with "you" and "we" removed)
(cur) (last)  22:45, 4 August 2003 Delirium m (Reverted to last edit by 217.24.129.50)
(cur) (last)  22:40, 4 August 2003 209.37.138.50
(cur) (last)  12:26, 3 July 2003 217.24.129.50
(cur) (last)  23:25, 5 June 2003 Gamma m (headers)
(cur) (last)  23:23, 5 June 2003 Gamma m (headers)
(cur) (last)  23:30, 4 June 2003 LittleDan m
(cur) (last)  18:04, 15 May 2003 199.190.225.44
(cur) (last)  17:09, 2 March 2003 Docu m (Upd. Links)
(cur) (last)  17:07, 2 March 2003 Docu m (Upd. Links)
(cur) (last)  02:34, 4 October 2002 63.201.24.93 m
(cur) (last)  13:52, 28 August 2002 Eclecticology m
(cur) (last)  16:25, 19 June 2002 Bryan Derksen m (-/Talk)
(cur) (last)  15:51, 25 February 2002 WojPob m
(cur) (last)  22:47, 28 January 2002 Conversion script m (Automated conversion)

[edit] Neglects to mention easiest method of "solving" (which isn't really solving at all)

i.e removing the stickers and putting them back in the default position. Far easier than all the rubbish mentioned here. --86.135.217.213 06:29, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

This method has been added. 68.52.56.111 19:52, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

That isn't solving. It's cheating. People who want to know how to solve a Rubik's Cube need not be taught how to peel the stickers off. Actually, if you practice, it's ten times faster (at least!) to solve it than to peel the stickers off. Besides, the stickers are nearly impossible to replace without an adhesive. --Ravi12346 00:54, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

What about taking the cube apart instead? If you're going to cheat, you may as well do it without rendering the cube unusable. --Ravi12346 00:55, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Can't you treat this seriously? Yes, you can take the stickers off and replace them, or disassemble and then reassemble the cube, but these do not constitute solving, and have their associated problems. The stickers are prone to peeling off after extended use; actively peeling them off only accelerates this. Disassembly risks permanent damage if not done properly. - Sorceror Nobody

[edit] Rotating the center faces

lol 105 moves.. well it works but there is a much simpler alternative at alchemistmatt's page: http://www.alchemistmatt.com/cube/rubikcenter.html will someone integrate this please. 218.102.220.129 01:59, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pictures!

This book needs pictures!!! Nate 22:48, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Desperately. The Step 3 description is so convoluted that by the end of the first paragraph one has no idea which edges he (or she) is meant to be solving.

Yes I completely agree with this. As someone who is trying to learn to solve the cube from this article, I can tell you it is extremely unclear on many points. I keep getting bad results and having to start again. I am finding vanderblonk.com significantly more helpful.

[edit] Clean up the description

As noted above, Step 3 is VERY difficult to comprehend. I would recommend rephrasing that section so that it conveys the thought process coherently. 99.225.118.72 (talk) 19:05, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 2 vs. ²

This page uses ² to denote half turns, but simply 2 is much more common. Should this be changed? --Ravi12346 00:49, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

I believe it should, if noone complains, I will change it. --Blonkm 17:04, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

How about Lⁿ, meaning n compositions of the operator L? Makes more sense than nL. --NF July 2007

Definitely not, this is a very mathematical way of showing algorithms. The cube may have some mathematical relatedness, but that doesn't make it necessary to make algorithms less readable. The standard notation adopted on the internet is to not use special characters or formatting, so just 2 will suffice. And by the way, it's not nL it's Ln --Blonkm (talk) 21:23, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Copyvio?

This page seems to be ripped from the following page: [2] (see solution #2). I would recommend a deletion or complete rewrite. 211.72.233.5 10:09, 8 October 2006 (UTC) (Ultra-Loser)

the page you linked [3] says "Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License [...]". The problem is that I can not be sure that this page is fully complying to the requirments of Section 4 of the GDFL. -- AnyFile 10:54, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Go ask Jeays since I believe he put it here himself. And in that case, there cannot be a violation. --Blonkm (talk) 21:38, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] White-other color?

In attempting to learn the method described in this article, I was immediately stumped by the description "white-other color (OC)". Is this a white piece with a particular color adjacent to it? Can this be clarified in the article?

I agree with you, this article was clearly not written with clarity in mind, though it is helping me to solve my cube.

Please someone edit this. I really have no clue what other-color means.

I agree wholeheartedly. I attempted to learn how to solve the cube with the explanation here and it was written so poorly I couldn't make heads or tails of one line of it. (edit: well i'm pleased to say i figured out how to solve the cube on my own.. and now reading back over this it certainly does make sense. and now i can say with a lot more certainty that it is worded horribly)

[edit] UB'R2D'U'RU2BR'B2L2 is gibberish to a beginner.

This page needs to start with a proper explanation of what the letters and numbers mean. A complete beginner (such as myself) has no idea. Dodger67 11:03, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

it does. click on the link under "notation" Sompm 02:58, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pictures in notation

The picture in the notation section under 'F' doesn't seem right to me. It looks like the cube's colors have been switched when there's meant to be a face rotation. Thinking there should be a white bar instead of a yellow one in the pic. Can anyone fix this?

[edit] Notation?

Is there any difference between R' and R? Article should mention something about it since the link doesn't

R´ denotes rotating the right face counterclockwise and R denotes rotating the right face clockwise. The notation is given in the Wikipedia article about the Rubik´s Cube: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rubik%27s_Cube. Erwin

[edit] Step 2 is incomplete

In step 2, three possibilities are given: the corner block is in the D layer (with the white face on either D or F/R face) or the corner block is in the correct position in the U layer. It is however also possible that the corner block is in the U layer, but not in the correct position. How should one proceed then? Erwin

Good point. Usually it is advised to take out the corner using one of the algorithms mentioned (it will push out the corner, since you are inserting another one). Then, again using one of the algorithms mentioned, you can solve the corner. This should be added (though IMHO this whole book needs a rewrite, which I have been pondering but never got to...) --Blonkm (talk) 21:26, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] This book needs to be rewritten

I would do it myself, but my English is very poor. I have read it all and a think the example solve is full of mistakes and ambiguity -- even if it gives a solve after all.

[edit] Step 5: Position corner pieces

I'm trying to solve a cube for the first time, and I was doing fine up until this step (the last corners). It mentions "the last 4 unsolved corners", but I have 5: the four U (opposite the nearly-solved white side) and the DRB "empty" corner. And the rest of the step is completely incomprehensible. What, exactly, am I putting DRB and UFL? This needs to be clarified or rewritten.

(update to above) I've figured out Step 5, but it's still badly written.65.96.201.130 (talk) 00:53, 30 December 2008 (UTC)