(Re-)considering The Limits

Reading the beginning og the thread there people are saying the limit will be 10 seconds on average and 5tps. It goes to show how much cubing has progressed. These days it seems that hardware is reaching it's limit. Or the times you can get on that puzzle. In Cubecast Feliks said that the shengshou 5x5 helped him to get sub 1. I think think that hardware wise, big cubes have the most possible potential to be improved. Whether hardware will improve remains to be seen. But with small cubes it seems the won't get much better. But who knows. Method wise it seems they won't get much better. Some may say but Yau is the main 4x4 method now. It's an improvement to reduction. They may think it's new, but Yau has been around for years. Just hardly anyone used it. Until Sebastian Weyer got his sun 30 average. If 5BLD set a world record with roux then more people will start switching to Roux. I personally think in 10 years the world records may not be that much better, world records will be rarer but beaten with times a little bit better. Due to this popularity might wane. Still in Athletics the world records aren't beaten that often the most regularly beaten world record is 100m. The field events for men world record are all from the 80's and 90's. This part about Athletics much seem off topic but it shows how something that has similar discussion at times about limits. But has been around for much, much, much longer.

In conclusion we haven't reached the limits but the top times may start to decrease in the near future. 7x7 is the event with the most improvement to be had. In my opinion.
 
The bigger cubes can definitely get faster, IMO. However, for the 3x3 I think we've pretty much came to the limit. Maybe 4 seconds could be the limit, but I think we're going to go to 3 or 2 seconds, for sure. Feliks has beat 5.55 a bunch of times unofficially, though, so I think we can get faster. The fastest recorded machine solve is 5.27, though, and I don't think humans can be much faster than machines, so…
 
tx789 said:
Reading the beginning og the thread there people are saying the limit will be 10 seconds on average and 5tps. It goes to show how much cubing has progressed. These days it seems that hardware is reaching it's limit. Or the times you can get on that puzzle. In Cubecast Feliks said that the shengshou 5x5 helped him to get sub 1. I think think that hardware wise, big cubes have the most possible potential to be improved. Whether hardware will improve remains to be seen. But with small cubes it seems the won't get much better. But who knows. Method wise it seems they won't get much better. Some may say but Yau is the main 4x4 method now. It's an improvement to reduction. They may think it's new, but Yau has been around for years. Just hardly anyone used it. Until Sebastian Weyer got his sun 30 average. If 5BLD set a world record with roux then more people will start switching to Roux. I personally think in 10 years the world records may not be that much better, world records will be rarer but beaten with times a little bit better. Due to this popularity might wane. Still in Athletics the world records aren't beaten that often the most regularly beaten world record is 100m. The field events for men world record are all from the 80's and 90's. This part about Athletics much seem off topic but it shows how something that has similar discussion at times about limits. But has been around for much, much, much longer.

In conclusion we haven't reached the limits but the top times may start to decrease in the near future. 7x7 is the event with the most improvement to be had. In my opinion.
Click to expand...

Out of all the sighted events, yes. But what about MBLD and 5BLD?
 
As for limits, I don't think sub-3 is possible. 4 second average if there is one extremely dedicated individual. Though I don't like to say they have to be talented, it always is annoying for people to give credit to random heretical factors when the person has put so much time and effort into their skill.

I think the other puzzles still have quite a way to go before they hit their mark.
 
Robocopter87 said:
As for limits, I don't think sub-3 is possible. 4 second average if there is one extremely dedicated individual. Though I don't like to say they have to be talented, it always is annoying for people to give credit to random heretical factors when the person has put so much time and effort into their skill.

I think the other puzzles still have quite a way to go before they hit their mark.
Click to expand...
*cough*2x2, pyra, and clock*cough*
 
PhillipEspinoza said:
“The only limits are, as always, those of vision.” James Broughton

That being said, there are no fcukin limits, other that the ones we put on ourselves. It's crazy how evident this is made by the whole thread.
Click to expand...
If you were to use any known speed solving method and do it in a second, you would have between 35-60 TPS. However, method development is still in progress but even then 1-look 3x3 would still be super hard to accomplish.
 
uvafan said:
*cough*2x2, pyra, and clock*cough*
Click to expand...

My apologies, I'm referring to Megaminx, the cubes past 4x4, and everything past 3x3 BLD. They all have a ways to go, I think.

The longer events I guess, 2x2 definitely is right there. Pyra is close but still has just a bit left. I don't know clock at all so I couldn't give an opinion.
 
Of course the absolute limit for solving is 0 seconds, at least until backward time travel becomes possible (-60 minutes limit if you count the Negative time solving contest ;) ). One thought I find interesting is that since we report our averages accurate to the hundredth of a second, then there are only 753 "possible" averages that are faster than the current world record 3x3x3 average. These are 7.52 seconds, 7.51 seconds, ... , 0.03 second, 0.02 second, 0.01 second, 0.00 second (less than 1 hundredth of a second). Of course I think an average solving time of less than one hundredth of a second seems absurd, but 7.52 seconds seems perfectly reasonable. This would lead me to believe that there is an absolute human limit, and I find thinking about what that limit is to be a fascinating train of thought!
 
According to me, the limits are :
2x2 : maybe a sub 2 average
3x3 : a 5 second average
4x4: a sub 20 single
5x5 : sub 50
And all these will only be possible if the cube hardware is improved. ( which I think won't be easily done )
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Michael Wimberly
What's considered a "normal" rate of progression?
2 3
Replies
58
Views
5,062
MrCubert
MrCubert
C
Please consider some cubes from my collection
Replies
1
Views
497
chadliam
C
abunickabhi
When do we consider a speedcuber to be washed up?
2
Replies
24
Views
2,769
Clock_Enthusiast
Clock_Enthusiast
precompsubwr
WCA Regulations Committee considering allowing logos for bld solving
Replies
19
Views
4,539
Jorian Meeuse
J
White KB
Guys, I'm considering making a diss track of DG the Artist... Submit Lyric Ideas and I'll credit you!
Replies
3
Views
774
JDAW6
JDAW6
Back
Top