• Welcome to the Speedsolving.com, home of the web's largest puzzle community!
    You are currently viewing our forum as a guest which gives you limited access to join discussions and access our other features.

    Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community of 40,000+ people from around the world today!

    If you are already a member, simply login to hide this message and begin participating in the community!

Magnets Discussion and Help thread

shadowslice e

Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2015
Messages
2,923
Location
192.168. 0.1
YouTube
Visit Channel
Would you use 3 magnets in each edge and 3 in each corner? That way you're using 2 magnets for the inner layers so it's always magnetized, then you magnetize the outside just like a 3x3, right?
He actually doubled the number of magnets in each piece so there are 4 in each edge and 6 in each corner.
 

One Wheel

Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2016
Messages
2,883
Location
Wisconsin
WCA
2016BAIR04
Has anyone tried magnetizing a mega? could help since most megas can't corner cut especially well.

I've thought about trying it. Does that count? My current poorly-modded ridged Dayan has a lot of trouble with catching that I don't think magnets would fix. Also I just took apart a couple of pieces and I think it would be absurdly difficult to fit magnets in there. You might be able to get away with using a very small, strong magnet. I don't know about other Megaminx designs. They might be easier.
 

aybuck37

Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2016
Messages
437
WCA
2015BUCK03
I've thought about trying it. Does that count? My current poorly-modded ridged Dayan has a lot of trouble with catching that I don't think magnets would fix. Also I just took apart a couple of pieces and I think it would be absurdly difficult to fit magnets in there. You might be able to get away with using a very small, strong magnet. I don't know about other Megaminx designs. They might be easier.
Imagine a magnetic florian mod megaminx
 

newtonbase

Premium Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2014
Messages
2,952
Location
MK, UK
WCA
2015ADAM03
YouTube
Visit Channel
To elaborate, I don't like that fact than in a normal 3x3, the magnets aren't symmetrical; so I put them in each shell of a piece too.
That's what put me off doing my Valk. To be symmetrical I'd have to put the magnet over the join and that proved to be beyond me. I hadn't considered doubling up the magnets.
Much less of an issue with capped cubes but there aren't too many out there.
 
Joined
Apr 23, 2010
Messages
1,391
Location
Scotland, UK
WCA
2009SHEE01
YouTube
Visit Channel
That's what put me off doing my Valk. To be symmetrical I'd have to put the magnet over the join and that proved to be beyond me. I hadn't considered doubling up the magnets.
Much less of an issue with capped cubes but there aren't too many out there.
What's so special about being symmetrical about the join in the piece? So long as the magnets in a piece have the same rotational symmetry as the piece itself and everything lines up correctly between all adjacent pieces, there should be no difference. Also, fewer magnets (by not doubling up) means less gluing, and fewer magnets misbehaving because there's so many other magnets nearby.

I understand why it might be a good idea for 4x4, but not why it would be relevant for 3x3.
 

newtonbase

Premium Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2014
Messages
2,952
Location
MK, UK
WCA
2015ADAM03
YouTube
Visit Channel
What's so special about being symmetrical about the join in the piece? So long as the magnets in a piece have the same rotational symmetry as the piece itself and everything lines up correctly between all adjacent pieces, there should be no difference. Also, fewer magnets (by not doubling up) means less gluing, and fewer magnets misbehaving because there's so many other magnets nearby.

I understand why it might be a good idea for 4x4, but not why it would be relevant for 3x3.
The only issue would be small misalignments when an edge is wrongly oriented. It wouldn't affect a solved cube and I doubt that it would affect the solving process but it bothers me.
 

xyzzy

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2015
Messages
2,878
What's so special about being symmetrical about the join in the piece?

I had my cube magnetised with the usual "asymmetric" magnet placement (two per edge, three per corner), and the layers snap into place with any misalignment between 12° anticlockwise and 24° clockwise. The difference isn't significant when turning single layers, but maybe it has a more noticeable (negative) effect on slice moves.
 

One Wheel

Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2016
Messages
2,883
Location
Wisconsin
WCA
2016BAIR04
The only issue would be small misalignments when an edge is wrongly oriented. It wouldn't affect a solved cube and I doubt that it would affect the solving process but it bothers me.

I was thinking the same thing, but I sat down to figure out how I might magnetize my 6x6, and I'm pretty sure I figured it out with 2 magnets per edge and 3 per corner, not centered on the seam. I haven't actually done it, so I might be wrong, but the thing is that every edge and pair of wings can flip 180° and every corner can twist 120°. As long as the magnets are, for example, at the outside top corner on the left and outside bottom corner on the right, when it's flipped the configuration will be the same as not flipped, and if it works in a solved state it should work in any scrambled state.

For 6x6:
-|-+|×-|--|-+|×
×|+-|-+|××|+-|-

-=no magnet
× and + show different polarities.
 
Last edited:

xyzzy

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2015
Messages
2,878
when it's flipped the configuration will be the same as not flipped, and if it works in a solved state it should work in any scrambled state.

Your idea works for the outer wings and the corners, but not the inner wings. If you took two wing pieces with, say, the + polarity and put them next to each other, there wouldn't be any attractive force between them; in effect, on a scrambled cube, the magnetic attraction between the third and fourth layers can be anything from zero to what you expected.

You could try putting magnets in the wing-centre pieces instead, but I don't think there's space to do that.
 

Chree

Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2013
Messages
1,233
Location
Portland, OR, USA
WCA
2013BROT01
YouTube
Visit Channel
Here's a video Michael Womack posted somewhere else. At 15 minutes he starts talking about 2x2's, and around the 16:20 he shows a solution to the polarity problem that people were wondering about for even layered puzzles.

The history he shares is pretty cool as well.

 

One Wheel

Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2016
Messages
2,883
Location
Wisconsin
WCA
2016BAIR04
Your idea works for the outer wings and the corners, but not the inner wings. If you took two wing pieces with, say, the + polarity and put them next to each other, there wouldn't be any attractive force between them; in effect, on a scrambled cube, the magnetic attraction between the third and fourth layers can be anything from zero to what you expected.

You could try putting magnets in the wing-centre pieces instead, but I don't think there's space to do that.

Uff da. I'm not sure if you're understanding my diagram correctly, but I think you're right. The two lines of the diagram are different halves of the edge. I was thinking that because with this configuration R B R' or R make a working configuration on the UF edge it was OK, but I realize now that R B' R2 puts two magnets of the same polarty in different halves of the inner wing next to each other. I think it would work with more magnets, like this:

-|-+|××|+-|-+|×
×|+-|-+|××|+-|-

2 more magnets per edge, so it would take 144 magnets to fully magnetize a 6x6.
 
Top