M and M'

Zaxef

Zaxef

Veteran
Joined
Jan 13, 2009
Messages
477
Location
Cambridge, Ontario, Canada
WCA ID
2009MATH02
I keep finding different information about these moves in algs..
I do M in the direction of an R
and M' in the direction of R'

However the Wiki says I have it backwards..
Yet all the OLL/PLL algs I use still work perfectly fine this way?
I suppose it's because the algs were written as r R' or r' R and I re-wrote them as M/M'.. but incorrectly

So I do have it wrong this whole time right? :/
 
Zaxef said:
I keep finding different information about these moves in algs..
I do M in the direction of an R
and M' in the direction of R'

However the Wiki says I have it backwards..
Yet all the OLL/PLL algs I use still work perfectly fine this way?
I suppose it's because the algs were written as r R' or r' R and I re-wrote them as M/M'.. but incorrectly

So I do have it wrong this whole time right? :/
Click to expand...
http://www.cubewhiz.com/notation.html

Some algs work, even if you get the M' wrong, like the M-slice Z-perm or the M-slice U perms, they're mirrors of each other.
 
I thought it made more sense that way.. lol.. oh well
I guess M goes with S and E though, so it makes sense in that way

I can't even write down algs I know without performing them anyway.. It's all in my muscle memory, so it doesn't really matter.. other than when I'm learning new algs heheh :o
 
The notation for slices and x, y, z make no sense. They aren't based on anything mathematical or even consistent. Yes, I understand their definitions, but there is nothing intuitive about them at all. Very arbitrarily defined.

Brian.
 
blgentry said:
The notation for slices and x, y, z make no sense. They aren't based on anything mathematical or even consistent. Yes, I understand their definitions, but there is nothing intuitive about them at all. Very arbitrarily defined.

Brian.
Click to expand...
Much like the English language. :-) And about as likely to get fixed.
 
blgentry said:
The notation for slices and x, y, z make no sense. They aren't based on anything mathematical or even consistent. Yes, I understand their definitions, but there is nothing intuitive about them at all. Very arbitrarily defined.

Brian.
Click to expand...

Actually, it is quite the opposite.

If you have done math up to a Middle School Level (8th grade) you will know about the X and Y axis. When drawing a graph you start with those two. Now for the third one (Z) imagine a third one coming straight out of the origin toward you. (Making perpendicular lines with X and Y axis), this is the Z axis.

So now, translate that onto a cube.

Put the core of the cube at the Origin, an X move is turning the cube on the X axis clockwise *Like and R Move*

X' is counterclockwise along the X axis *Like and R' Move*

Now apply that to the other turns.

Y is turning clockwise along the Y axis, *Like a U Move*

Y' is turning counterclockwise along the Y axis *Like a U' Move*

And now Z, which is translated onto F and B.

Z is turning the cube clockwise along the Z axis *Like an F Move*

Z' is like turning the cube counterclockwise along the Z axis *Like and F' Move*

Hope this helps.

~Chris
 
blgentry said:
The notation for slices and x, y, z make no sense. They aren't based on anything mathematical or even consistent. Yes, I understand their definitions, but there is nothing intuitive about them at all. Very arbitrarily defined.

Brian.
Click to expand...

Well, you do not need to use the MES- and xyz-notations. You may use f, r, u for slice moves and [f], [r], for cube rotations. See Rules 12a9) and 12b1) in the WCA regulations (http://www.x.se/dwm).

/Anders
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top