# Thread: Supercube centers and odd parity

1. Originally Posted by cmowla
No. I did not mean the maximum, but for all values r and all degrees n.
Actually, yes, that's what my formula is, unless I made an error. Anyway, when you ask "how many center pieces cannot be solved" the most reasonable interpretation is that you're looking for the extremal value, i.e. the largest number of centers you can be left with after solving as many pieces as possible with 3-cycles alone. If you want something more specific you have to ask for it (at the time, not a month later).

Since you've been an ass before I'm not going to help you out with finding the "general" formula, although it should be pretty obvious if you just take a few seconds to think about it. It's probably already posted in the topic.

2. It's not really about seniority or world records or any of that stuff, but just the way people act. (A few of the senior people can get away with being mean, but they do walk a fine line - if they are mean and incorrect at the same time, they stand to lose a lot of respect because other people will think of them as just being jerks.) Most of the people who are widely respected and liked around here got there essentially by showing intelligence and diplomacy/politeness. If your goal is to become part of the community you should just focus on that; stuff like having records and accomplishments develops naturally as a result of experience, practice, and knowledge, and is in no way a prerequisite.

Anyway I'm pretty sure the post with the general formula is at http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/sh...603#post243603. I had to have that formula in order to figure out the maximum number of centers you can be off by. In the formula I used m for the number of separate slice depths on the NxNxN cube (or floor((N-2)/2)).

3. Please you guys, take it up in PM.

No I don't have anything useful to say in regards to the original question.

I would like to say though that you cant expect respect from "senior" members when you only have a few (although very good) posts. Im still trying to find that subtle, but drastic change in the STYLE of my posts. I feel that's what gets you respected(somewhat), a certain style of posting.
Once I do get it though, Im in the clear.

4. All I do is solve all the colours first, then orient the centres after, because it dosent mess anything else up.

5. Originally Posted by Edward
I would like to say though that you cant expect respect from "senior" members when you only have a few (although very good) posts.
That makes it sound like no one should ever deserve immediate respect, which is just false.

I'd even say everyone begins with full respect if they don't act stupid (e.g. follow the obvious rules), although developing authority takes time.

6. I finished adding to and editing this document a little more than a year ago, but it is directly related to this thread.

It includes two derivations of the formula for the minimum number of center pieces to affected for a certain number of orbits of wings affected. In addition, the PDF has my derivations for two maximum formulas which I have mentioned before (including qqwref's maximum formula in this thread), and other miscellaneous results.

There are more ways to derive these formulas, I'm sure, but I just wanted to share this document and see how everyone likes it.

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•