4D Rubik's cube
DDEckerslyke
I thought it was worth a look
http://www.plunk.org/~hatch/MagicCube4dApplet/
cheers
dd
Peter Webb
I say almost, because it consists of 7 cubes glued together. I would have
thought (and I am sure somebody will correct me if I am wrong) that it would
require an 8th cube, glued to the outside face of one of the 6 outer cubes.
As it is, it is a 4d cube with one one "face" missing. A strange mistake to
have made, if indeed it is mistake.
"DDEckerslyke" <spa...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3f721...@mk-nntp-1.news.uk.worldonline.com...
Patrick Hamlyn
>"DDEckerslyke" <spa...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:3f721...@mk-nntp-1.news.uk.worldonline.com...
>> Just found this. I've no idea if the maths/physics behind this is sound
>but
>> I thought it was worth a look
>>
>> http://www.plunk.org/~hatch/MagicCube4dApplet/
>Its almost a 4D rubiks cube.
>
>I say almost, because it consists of 7 cubes glued together. I would have
>thought (and I am sure somebody will correct me if I am wrong) that it would
>require an 8th cube, glued to the outside face of one of the 6 outer cubes.
>As it is, it is a 4d cube with one one "face" missing. A strange mistake to
>have made, if indeed it is mistake.
<fixed top-post>
Actually there appear to be eight cubes, but you can only see seven at a time.
Note how the colours initially are blue in the centre surrounded by red, yellow,
orange, pink, purple and cyan. Now rotate a couple times and suddenly there are
green cubies in there, arrived from hyperspace somewhere. It doesn't help that
the red and orange are very nearly indistiguishable, nor that the blue and
purple are a bit close too.
--
Patrick Hamlyn posting from Perth, Western Australia
Windsurfing capital of the Southern Hemisphere
Moderator: polyforms group (polyforms...@egroups.com)
John Bailey
Some time ago, I had fun comparing Hatch's cube with mine. (at
http://home.rochester.rr.com/jbxroads/4cube.html)
The way the states of the tesseracts are displayed is obviously quite
different. 4cube is much more diagramatic, Hatch's is beautiful.
4cube is a 2x2x2x2 cube, Hatch's is 3x3x3x3. 4cube ignores the
orientation of the cubies, Hatch's includes these orientations.
As a result of its simplifications, 4cube has less states than the 3D
Rubik's cube and since there are more ways to manipulate it, it's
actually easier to solve.
The important thing about either "cube" is that the display
representation must match the underlying abstraction--which a little
diagramming and extrapolation can account for. In the case of 4cube,
please do look at the source code, written in Javascript. Four
functions do it all.
John Bailey
http://home.rochester.rr.com/jbxroads/mailto.html