Cyrus C.
Veteran
Can anyone provide a way to figure the state of a shape-shifting cube that has the most surface area, without using guess & check? Let's use the Fisher's Cube as an example.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Superflip + 90deg twisted corners + Pi OLL on U and D.
That's what I think.
...Would a formula that works for any shape-shifting cube even be possible?
I don't necessarily think there is a correlation between minimum surface area (like cubeshape on a Fisher or Sq-1) to maximum surface area. The max surface area on a Sq-1 is less than the max surface area on a Fisher Cube, assuming they have the same surface area solved (and thus, same dimensions).
I don't necessarily think there is a correlation between minimum surface area (like cubeshape on a Fisher or Sq-1) to maximum surface area. The max surface area on a Sq-1 is less than the max surface area on a Fisher Cube, assuming they have the same surface area solved (and thus, same dimensions).
Yeah, this is true, because the way the puzzle works turns pieces differently, etc.
I would say that if more pieces jut out, then there is more surface area.
It's like dividing a 2x2x2 cube (SA 24 units) into 8 1x1x1 pieces (SA 48 units)
I meant puzzles that were just modifications of a 3x3x3. Bump Cube, Fisher's Cube, etc.I would say that if more pieces jut out, then there is more surface area.
It's like dividing a 2x2x2 cube (SA 24 units) into 8 1x1x1 pieces (SA 48 units)
That's based on the claim that all of the pieces are the same size.
Which, to be frank, they're not.
Replying to Cyrus's question, I don't think so.
If a Sq-1 counted as a 3x3x3 shapeshifting cube (no centres, and a bandaged middle layer, but with shapeshifting abilities), then the max surface area of a Sq-1 would, imo, be different than the max on a Fisher.