Magic prediction with the Rubik's Cube! How?

[PatrickJameson]

i just tried out stopping exactly 2.00 on qqtimer. i took me 38 tries to get it. so consiedering i am bad and you can do it after 20 times the chance to get 2 in a row is 1 in 400 (i know its a really bad calculation)
but that just sounds impossible.

I just tried stopping 1.86 on my stackmat, and got it in 7 tries. 1 in 49 dosent seem to be anywhere near impossible, and thats more likely than getting a 3x3 PLL skip (1 in 72).

Now try doing that while turning a cube and trying to finish(a pll if, you're actually going to test this) semi-close to a specific time.

 

[Johan444]

i just tried out stopping exactly 2.00 on qqtimer. i took me 38 tries to get it. so consiedering i am bad and you can do it after 20 times the chance to get 2 in a row is 1 in 400 (i know its a really bad calculation)
but that just sounds impossible.

I just tried stopping 1.86 on my stackmat, and got it in 7 tries. 1 in 49 dosent seem to be anywhere near impossible, and thats more likely than getting a 3x3 PLL skip (1 in 72).

Do 20 tries and see how many you get. I'll be surprised if you get more than 1.

 

[Daniel Que]

Woahhh. That's great if you want to get a really good standard deviation. Will you tell us how you do this?

How did you do this????!?!??!?@?@?@#?!#!?$!@?!

did you guys like not read my post at all?

Generally if you post in a thread you, i dont know, READ what other people have said......

or at least thats what ive observed.

jms_gears1, your first post about your speculation on how the trick was done expressed a sense of uncertainty, especially because it was a speculation and you had no way to tell for sure. I was asking Cubemir whether or not he will tell us how it was done so I could know without doubt, and not for suggestions that have no evidence to based upon, by other people who don't know any more than I do about this trick. Of course I read the posts of other people because there weren't many replies at the time, but people can't be expected to always read every other post in longer threads.

Not seeing other people's faces doesn't justify being rude to them.

 

[ben1996123]

i just tried out stopping exactly 2.00 on qqtimer. i took me 38 tries to get it. so consiedering i am bad and you can do it after 20 times the chance to get 2 in a row is 1 in 400 (i know its a really bad calculation)
but that just sounds impossible.

I just tried stopping 1.86 on my stackmat, and got it in 7 tries. 1 in 49 dosent seem to be anywhere near impossible, and thats more likely than getting a 3x3 PLL skip (1 in 72).

Do 20 tries and see how many you get. I'll be surprised if you get more than 1.

Got it on...

3rd try, 10th try, 14th try, 16th try, and 17th try.

Thats 1 in 4...

 

[Daniel Wu]

But you have to predict the time, solve the cube, and stop the timer at the right time. Solving the cube adds another element into that because you could write down 15 or something and get an 18.

 

[Dene]

But you have to predict the time, solve the cube, and stop the timer at the right time. Solving the cube adds another element into that because you could write down 15 or something and get an 18.

Well obviously you wouldn't show that one on camera, now would you?
Also, you would have a good idea of what time you will roughly get because you will have done the solve probably 10+ times already.

 

[Zarxrax]

Even assuming he did somehow manage to do it because he's just that good...
He sat that for hours and hours trying to capture it for the video...
That still doesn't explain the fact that he claims to be able to do this 3-5 times in a row. Doing it twice is extremely difficult. Doing it 5 times would be nigh on impossible.

 

[Deleted member 4527]

wow this is so cool..

 

[That70sShowDude]

i just tried out stopping exactly 2.00 on qqtimer. i took me 38 tries to get it. so consiedering i am bad and you can do it after 20 times the chance to get 2 in a row is 1 in 400 (i know its a really bad calculation)
but that just sounds impossible.

I just tried stopping 1.86 on my stackmat, and got it in 7 tries. 1 in 49 dosent seem to be anywhere near impossible, and thats more likely than getting a 3x3 PLL skip (1 in 72).

Do 20 tries and see how many you get. I'll be surprised if you get more than 1.

Got it on...

3rd try, 10th try, 14th try, 16th try, and 17th try.

Thats 1 in 4...

Yea, I got 1.86 5 times.

 

[Stefan]

Do 20 tries and see how many you get. I'll be surprised if you get more than 1.

Got it on...
3rd try, 10th try, 14th try, 16th try, and 17th try.

Yea, I got 1.86 5 times.

I only got it three times

 

[miniGOINGS]

Did Stefan edit 70's post!

I really think that he just tried the scrambles over and over, and only showed his succesful tries.

 

[Zarxrax]

If it's so possible to do this twice in a row with an actual cube, I would like to see someone else do it just once. Just once, that shouldn't be so hard, right? And be sure to count how many tries it takes you

 

[Rune]

Do 20 tries and see how many you get. I'll be surprised if you get more than 1.

Got it on...
3rd try, 10th try, 14th try, 16th try, and 17th try.

Yea, I got 1.86 5 times.

I only got it three times

Do you remember that, Stefan?
But three 0.203 in a row looks suspicious.

Yes, the timer isn't quite accurate. I started with 0.4xy because I expected a yellow light before the green, and then I got 0.203 four times in a row.

 

[amostay2004]

May I request the thread starter to post another video showing 3 or more successful tries? For all we know he could be lying

(Of course, it's also an excuse to further analyse his attempts )

 

[coinman]

Maybe there is a clue on his homepage? http://cubemir.ru/index.html

 

[Rune]

Maybe there is a clue on his homepage? http://cubemir.ru/index.html

No!

 

[Justin@pie]

IMBA!!!

 

[CharlieCooper]

I love this

 

[Tim Reynolds]

Personally, I'm with Mr. Pochmann on this. I don't see how it can be so outrageous to roughly guess what the time will be, and then drag the solve out to the desired result. The rest is just luck.

I invented an interesting trick

trick - the art or knack of doing something skillfully

A trick is something a whore does for money.

...or cocaine!

Anyway, this is quite an impressive illusion. I doubt that rehearsed scrambles alone could achieve this, similarly to how people don't get exactly the same magic time every attempt. Right now I'm leaning towards fake timer--as long as it stops within .03 of the correct time, it's not noticeable. That way, it's luck with a little buffer--it still will take a few attempts probably, but not too many. Actually, adding a rehearsed scramble to the mix means he has perfect lookahead, so he can focus on getting the right time instead of worrying about the solve. So yeah, I'm leaning towards a fake timer, multiple attempts, and probably a rehearsed scramble.

 

[Kian]

A trick is something a whore does for money.

...or cocaine!

Gob.