Hazel
Premium Member
So RedKB's center-swap alg would be like this?: UR/ FL/ UF UR\ FL\
Nice! Just to be clear, is every so far in agreement that the ideal scramble would be like squan where initially the puzzle is just put in a random state, then jumbling moves are applied?This is great development. I'll be updating the word files tomorrow with all of the community changes.
It should be FD FR// FU FR/ since the FR edge turns a full 180 degrees during the algorithm.Also just for even more clarity: At 4:40 in RedKB's jumbling tutorial the algorithm he does would be this, correct?: FD FR/ FU FR/
It's a bit hard to tell from video :/
Nice! Just to be clear, is every so far in agreement that the ideal scramble would be like squan where initially the puzzle is just put in a random state, then jumbling moves are applied?
It's definitely easier to write a scrambler that first randomly permutes the pieces before randomly jumbling them, which of course has the same effect as long as the jumbles are chosen with the correct probabilities.The state that is randomly generated is the eventual state in the end, not a state in a subgroup.
Any notation ideas that have been discussed here so far make me strongly not want this as an official WCA event ever.
It's definitely easier to write a scrambler that first randomly permutes the pieces before randomly jumbling them, which of course has the same effect as long as the jumbles are chosen with the correct probabilities.
I don't disagree, but I'm pretty sure that methodology is not how the current Sq1 scrambler works.
Oh same.Any notation ideas that have been discussed here so far make me strongly not want this as an official WCA event ever.
Sure, but maybe for the Curvy Copter it'd be easier to use this approach rather than directly coding a solver that can handle arbitrary jumbled shapes.I don't disagree, but I'm pretty sure that methodology is not how the current Sq1 scrambler works.
Oh same.
The front/back slash notation looks supremely confusing. If / and \ are supposed to be "atomic" clockwise and anticlockwise turns (70 degrees or 40 degrees, depending), and if // and \\ are inverses of \ and / respectively, how the heck would // and / differ? You're just arbitrarily deciding that one of them should refer to 180° + an atomic turn. Also, why / for clockwise and \ for anticlockwise?
Just use notation like UF1, UF2, UF3, UF2', UF1' (the "1"s may be omitted) to denote however many atomic turns of that one edge, imo.
I don’t blame you. It is a bit of a mess right now, but right now things are still developing in the growing pains stage. This is the first time curvy copper has really been discussed seriously in a long time. Hopefully things can be more polished over time.The state that is randomly generated is the eventual state in the end, not a state in a subgroup.
Any notation ideas that have been discussed here so far make me strongly not want this as an official WCA event ever.
I think you misunderstood xyzzy - he's proposing a different way to write the notation. UF2 in SALOW notation would be UF// (or is it UF\\? further proving his point that the slashes are extremely confusing). I think using numbers is much clearer and much easier to read than slashes.As for your system, in SALOW, "UF2" is the equivalent of "U4" on 3x3.
Haha, yeah. (I didn't read carefully enough, so mixing up / and \ is totally my fault. But I still stand by my claim that it's confusing.)I think you misunderstood xyzzy - he's proposing a different way to write the notation. UF2 in SALOW notation would be UF// (or is it UF\\? further proving his point that the slashes are extremely confusing). I think using numbers is much clearer and much easier to read than slashes.
I agree it is confusing now. basically the way I look at it, the slash mirrors the position of the edge. FR\ is one partial turn of the FR edge and the edge is tilted like the slash. We may need to look into this system more to improve itHaha, yeah. (I didn't read carefully enough, so mixing up / and \ is totally my fault. But I still stand by my claim that it's confusing.)
Oops I guess I had the directions mixed up too, not to mention this idea doesn’t quite make sense when the cube is heavily jumbled. I’d much prefer numbers or +/- to this notation.I agree it is confusing now. basically the way I look at it, the slash mirrors the position of the edge. FR\ is one partial turn of the FR edge and the edge is tilted like the slash. We may need to look into this system more to improve it
Oops I guess I had the directions mixed up too, not to mention this idea doesn’t quite make sense when the cube is heavily jumbled. I’d much prefer numbers or +/- to this notation.
That still doesn't make sense to me. Wouldn't that make RF+ turning the puzzle the smallest amount clockwise and RF- turning the puzzle the second smallest amount counterclockwise (since the smallest amount counterclockwise would necessarily be RF-', the inverse of RF+)?Good news: I just got a curvy copter; I am realizing what might be the best system is this:
RF+, RF+', RF, RF-', RF. RF-' is the inverse of RF+, and RF+' is the inverse of RF-.