Pseudo God's Algorithm Human nxnxn Rubik's Cube Solving Method Created

[irontwig]

Am I after all getting all of the credit? You better believe it. If someone cannot understand that basic "justice of merit", then I have nothing else to say because I believe people should be rewarded for their work, especially if it's original and groundbreaking. Getting a pat on the back from a community who some of its members have already accused me of being a liar about this very discovery is "not an honor" to me. Sorry.

What kind of reward are you expecting? I'm not sure what kind of grandiose scenario you are imagining. Is it really a shock that big claims followed by no substantiation would be result in some people not believing you?

 

[Christopher Mowla]

You never know. This could be a whole new way of analyising all sorts of things such as permutation groups which could be very useful if the method us analysed in a mathematical sense.

The method *is* derived and formed from mathematics in my book. I start from the mathematical basics and definitions (using common terminology and then using new terminology for new concepts), and I build and build in complexity throughout the text on proving Per's commutator conjecture. I present this general solving approach in the very last chapter following the theory from which it was created.

Don't misunderstand me. You won't have to read (and understand) everything in the book to be able to use this solving approach, just as you don't need to understand everything in a math textbook to solve a problem in it. However, being able to have an idea of different possible solutions, relationships, and interconnections requires you to read and understand everything within the text.

So those well-versed in such mathematical content that you mentioned can immediately see whether it has applications or not. Those that are not can probably learn quite a lot (since I start from the basics) and then do some research and then find out.

Also, Chris, in the current incarnation will this be at all good for speedcubing on any size of cube or minx or will it be a method which is FMC-like (not in terms of efficiency but in terms of approach)?

I'm not sure what you mean exactly.

I know that this is not a speed focused method but I was just wondering if any of it was transferable, especially on the bigger cubes.

Since you allow any possibility (including exceptions), I can presume that the answer is yes.

This solving approach can help us see algorithms from a different perspective, but I cannot make any promises about its current incarnation in regards to big cube FMC (because I don't do FMC) and speedsolving (because I don't consider myself a speedsolver).

In addition, I'm not sure why you are asking these questions because that is not what this thread is about.

What kind of reward are you expecting? I'm not sure what kind of grandiose scenario you are imagining. Is it really a shock that big claims followed by no substantiation would be result in some people not believing you?

When someone who can help me achieve my goal asks me to prove what I say is true, I will. I haven't got any feedback from anyone who can/is willing to. So what you're asking does not apply.

 

[zyxantjcae654]

So using the 'patterns' of nxnxn puzzles for professional aspects? What are the requirements of someone you need(I think I'm not qualified, but just to clarify)? I am intrigued about the title.

 

[shadowslice e]

So using the 'patterns' of nxnxn puzzles for professional aspects? What are the requirements of someone you need(I think I'm not qualified, but just to clarify)? I am intrigued about the title.

No one knows except Chris and he doesn't want to say just yet. Cone back in (probably) about a year.

My guess is that the method is proving some commutator conjecture and using it dissect algs in a new light which will somehow provide a mathematical approach to solve the cube by creating a series of pseudoblocks which will then be aligned in a way similar to heise F2L-1 except the while cube will be solved

Oh wait, sorry, I misread your post (again! :/) but I'm leaving this post here for people who want to understand what we have so far oh the method

I'm not sure what you mean exactly.

I mean can this method be speeded up to solve fast or will it take some time to work out what you have to do to solve?

 

[Christopher Mowla]

What are the requirements of someone you need(I think I'm not qualified, but just to clarify)? I am intrigued about the title.

He or she needs to be a member of either a reputable company who believes in educational projects or an educational organization knowledgeable about marketing who believes in educational projects. I am not too particular on what type of company it is (government funded, privately owned, etc.), but I clearly I would like to partner with an organization that believes in "my cause", has a reputation for promoting "other causes", has resources, and has marketing skills.

EDIT:

I mean can this method be speeded up to solve fast or will it take some time to work out what you have to do to solve?

It can't be sped up. You can certainly use it to create algorithms (which you obviously can memorize and get your muscles used to).

The reason I know that it can't be sped up is because, can you really speed up solving Sudoku to the point that you can solve any Sudoku puzzle in seconds? Surely you can learn tricks to become more efficient, but obviously the answer to what your question implies is no.

 

[tseitsei]

So basically what you are saying is that:
1) I have invented totally groundbreaking new method to solve rubiks cubes of any size
2) I will not publish my method if someone doesnt pay me money to do so...

That sounds weird/greed/idiotic to me. People like petrus and roux invented new awesome methods and shared them for free. Thats what speedcubing community should be like imo. And people give them credit for inventing those methods.

Also why would you think that someone would give you money for inventing a new rubiks cube solving method?

 

[Kyle™]

I'm sorry I don't know your background so well Mr. Mowla, so I can't entirely judge your personality, but it seems by this thread you want some sort of over the top recognition for your work.
I understand you may have put some considerable effort into this, but most people seem to agree that it doesn't warrant a monetary reward, or mainstream coverage. The reward should be the victory of your discovery, and the recognition from a community that is eager to absorb the information you have to share. I'm interested in most cubing topics, and I probably wouldn't even take a course on this if it was 100% free and 5 minutes from my house. Even if it was published online for free, I'd probably prefer a TLDR version. So, even if I try really hard, I can't imagine the possibility of a successful college program involving this topic. You have the best feedback you could ever ask for just by reading this thread. People really have no interest in anything but receiving free information, because that's the way this community works. You have some information to teach/share, but the only people with even the slightest bit of interest are the ones right here. So far it seems you've made an incredible claim, stated you essentially want compensation for your work, and that most people here aren't going to change your mind. When an infinitesimal percentage of the population has interest in cubing, and the majority of this percentage is telling you that you're barking up the wrong tree, I really see no other respectable choice of action but to listen carefully and reconsider your decision.

 

[Christopher Mowla]

I was going to respond to tseitsei, but he/she is just asking for a flame war that I'm just not going to deliver. Sorry.

@Kyle, I will pm you shortly to ask you a few questions.

@admin, please close this thread. It is going nowhere.

• To all of those who participated in the poll, I appreciate your time (even if you voted against it).
• To all of those who actually tried to give me advice to accomplish my goal, I appreciate your time.
• To all of those who have not read this thread before it was closed and wish to help, feel free to pm me.

 

[adimare]

@admin, please close this thread. It is going nowhere.

yes please

 

[zyxantjcae654]

Before this thread is closed, I just want to share my views. I think the study and use about this idea might be helpful on other branches of mathematical studies or programming, than actually FMC. It is best to advertise on other sites. Because cubers here needs info about patterns tolerable by human minds. I think you, sir, are best with professional personalities than actual cubers. I don't see your ideas nonsense; It is just not suitable for someone who enjoys the puzzles. I guess it would be better--since you can't produce volunteers--to be the volunteer yourself, in a reputable organization, and propose your ideas. Also, it may be possible in the future that universities require your work as a subject of various courses than as a course. All are my opinions.

 

[Christopher Mowla]

@zyxantjcae654, that is very interesting. I'll keep that in mind!

Just to show everyone two important characteristics I have developed in recent years simultaneously as I was working on this project (two key attributes that allowed me to accomplish what I did), I will parallel this cubing feat accomplishment with recent accomplishments in a game that I have played for sometime now (Knights and Merchants),

1. An extreme level of patience and persistence and blind faith. Zombie Apocalypse, (KaM Remake)
   It took four months of training/experimentation/retrying/thinking/planning for me to beat this mission where nearly 10,000 script generated AI troops come and attack my base which could produce no more than 800 troops.
   Analogy: It took years of research to find what I did, and the chances of me failing on my quest, even when I was near the end (i.e., wave 60 in this game) I had no way of knowing if all of the work I had done would have meant anything until I solved the last middle edge cases with a single commutator. None who attempted this map succeeded before me.
2. A desire to tackle every "orbit" simultaneously. Knights and Merchants TSK 20 Map Won in Under 6 Minutes
   Analogy: It takes the average player 4.5 hours to beat this final mission in this game. In this map, there are four AI towns/villages one must defeat as well as two large initial armies, and players typically have destroyed one town at a time after they defeat the two initial armies. In this replay of mine, I destroy ALL villages and kill all troops simultaneously.

 

[Praetorian]

a summary:

this was a waste of time and was only used as a way of getting our hopes up and being let down at the promise of some groundbreaking discovery of a method

 

[AlexMaass]

post the method

until then this thread is stupid and pointless

 

[stoic]

It's a shame to see the acrimony and negativity in this thread.
I guess some people do feel they've had their hopes built up and dashed and I can understand why.
The KaM stuff is interesting for background (I read the full forum thread linked), and the OP's previous work is of a high enough standard for me to be indulgently sympathetic. I also fully understand why, having worked on this alone for a substantial amount of time, and to a high standard with a fully-finished book product, he wouldn't want to give his intellectual property away for free. Comments like "the community demands it" (I'm paraphrasing, obviously) aren't helpful.
I do hope, however that it does see the light of day in some way in the fullness of time and that people can benefit from it.

Just my two cents...the Internet...opinions, huh?

 

[Christopher Mowla]

a summary:

this was a waste of time and was only used as a way of getting our hopes up and being let down at the promise of some groundbreaking discovery of a method

How selfish can you be?

(1) I never promised that I would show the method right now. Maybe you promised that I would to yourself?
(2) It was a waste of your time? How long did you spend reading this thread? Do you think that's equivalent to 2.5 years that you just want me to let go!? Poor summary, indeed.

post the method

until then this thread is stupid and pointless

Stop acting childish. I made the purpose of this thread very clear. If you made it into something else that it was not meant to be, don't blame me.

@stoic, thank you for showing some decency and understanding. (Also, for all of those who have been following this thread and have not been posting negative comments - which includes those who have not posted at all - thank you.)

 

[tseitsei]

@zyxantjcae654, that is very interesting. I'll keep that in mind!

Just to show everyone two important characteristics I have developed in recent years simultaneously as I was working on this project (two key attributes that allowed me to accomplish what I did), I will parallel this cubing feat accomplishment with recent accomplishments in a game that I have played for sometime now (Knights and Merchants),

1. An extreme level of patience and persistence and blind faith. Zombie Apocalypse, (KaM Remake)
   It took four months of training/experimentation/retrying/thinking/planning for me to beat this mission where nearly 10,000 script generated AI troops come and attack my base which could produce no more than 800 troops.
   Analogy: It took years of research to find what I did, and the chances of me failing on my quest, even when I was near the end (i.e., wave 60 in this game) I had no way of knowing if all of the work I had done would have meant anything until I solved the last middle edge cases with a single commutator. None who attempted this map succeeded before me.
2. A desire to tackle every "orbit" simultaneously. Knights and Merchants TSK 20 Map Won in Under 6 Minutes
   Analogy: It takes the average player 4.5 hours to beat this final mission in this game. In this map, there are four AI towns/villages one must defeat as well as two large initial armies, and players typically have destroyed one town at a time after they defeat the two initial armies. In this replay of mine, I destroy ALL villages and kill all troops simultaneously.

Ok this keeps getting more and more ridiculous IMHO...

Instead of telling how your method actually works you decide to tell us how good you are at playing some random and totally unrelated game...

We are talking about a method for solving rubiks cube here... Not some new revolutionary Theory of relativity or something like that.

You have no doubt used much time to develop your method. Well most of the speedcubers have also used several thousands of hours to develop their skills in speedsolving. They do it because they found it FUN. Not because they are expecting to see financial profit. Rubiks cube is our hobby and not our job...

 

[Christopher Mowla]

Instead of telling how your method actually works you decide to tell us how good you are at playing some random and totally unrelated game...

Can't you read? I was giving an analogy. So I related why I showed that. Now I know you're so stubborn that you just want to write anything as an excuse to complain. If you don't like this thread, LEAVE. No one asked you to participate.

Also, I completely understand how many hours are put into speedsolving. I prefer to spend those hours towards developing new puzzle theory which cannot be lost in time as a speedsolving skill can be. Now, equivalently, there are speedcubers who both spend many hours trying to get faster and develop "theory" of speedsolving to help others improve. They document the do's and don'ts which will never be lost in time.

They can attend competitions and win money. They can be hired to speedsolve and earn money (because it's a good party trick or "country x has talent" for sure).

Similarly, just as book authors who write calculus textbooks earn money (for a subject that they neither invented nor perfected), I figured I can make money being the first to write a textbook about this topic.

If you don't want to use cubing for any gain besides "fun", that's fine. However, that doesn't mean that I or speedcubers like Dan Harris need to be that way.

 

[tseitsei]

Can't you read? I was giving an analogy. So I related why I showed that.

Oh I can read just fine. Your analogy was just really bad IMO...

Anyone who has practised ANY sport/game/other stuff somewhat seriously knows that They need to use countless hours for practising and yet even after that there will be no guarantees that you will be good enough to reach your goals... Yet they do it because they like what they do. Not because they need to but because they want to. That is nothing special. That doesn't make you special. VERY MANY people do this at some point of their lives for some sport/game/event...

 

[adimare]

How selfish can you be?

You're the one being selfish here. I'm just glad that you (maybe) came up with something as meaningless as a solution to the Rubik's cube instead of something that's actually important.

If it's all about making money, just get a clickbank account and start selling it online...

 

[Rnewms]

Good luck, Chris. I suggest you temporarily keep the topic away from here. Getting published is apparently frowned upon. I'm totally interested in theory, and I hope you get to share it in the way that you see best.