Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 39 of 39

Thread: Calculating "The Devil's Algorithm"

  1. #31

    Default

    Are we sure that there is no solution shorter than the ones suggested above?

  2. #32

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 930913 View Post
    Are we sure that there is no solution shorter than the ones suggested above?
    This:

    Quote Originally Posted by qqwref View Post
    As far as I know, though, there's nothing theoretically stopping us from making a sequence that is about 1/1260 of the length of the full Devil's Algorithm, such that applying the sequence over and over will go through every position at some point (i.e. the sequence 1260 times is its own Devil's Algorithm). It wouldn't help much in practice, though, since it would still be over 10^16 moves long.

  3. #33

    Default

    Are we sure that that is the smallest algorithm possible?

  4. #34

  5. #35

    Default

    whauk, your argument is correct. I think that a bit of group theory simplifies it. If such an algorithm g existed, then the group of the 3x3x3 cube would be cyclic (generated by one element), in particular abelian (commutative). However, it is not, because for instance RU is not equal to UR.

    However, one could ask if there is a sequence of movements g such that any position can be obtained WHILE performing g a given number of times. I.e. g*a times and a prefix of the sequence of movements of g. ONe can prove that the maximal order of an element of the 3x3x3 Rubik Group is 1260, i.e. there is no sequence that will only return to the initial state after strictly MORE than 1260 repetitions. Since the cube has 43252003274489856000 positions, the a lower bound for the length of this algorithm would be 43252003274489856000/1260 = 34326986725785600 moves, which would make it quite difficult to memorize...

  6. #36

    Default

    What if you a had an algorithm with a traversal of two that would go through half of the possible combinations of a three by three . That seems easier to find.

  7. #37
    Member ben1996123's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Ponyville
    WCA Profile
    2009WHIT01
    YouTube
    ben1996123
    Posts
    4,233

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thekirbycross View Post
    What if you a had an algorithm with a traversal of two that would go through half of the possible combinations of a three by three . That seems easier to find.
    you're late. devils alg for 3x3 has already been found.
    stop changing my sig
    ponies are qt

  8. #38
    Member piece popper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    NC, USA
    Posts
    47

    Default

    Wouldn't it be pointless to have a devils algorithm for the 3x3 since there are so many permutations?

  9. #39
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    New York, NY, USA
    WCA Profile
    2007SUNT01
    YouTube
    swordsmankirby
    Posts
    1,794

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by piece popper View Post
    Wouldn't it be pointless to have a devils algorithm for the 3x3 since there are so many permutations?
    No one said it'd be useful in practice.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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