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

Are you interested in this method (and perhaps a course to introduce it)?

  • Yes

    Votes: 124 87.9%

  • No

    Votes: 17 12.1%
  • Total voters
    141
Why the **** aren't you posting the method? It is a method for solving a Rubik's Cube. It isn't that important, tbh. Interesting, but not important. It's not like you just combined General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics. In my opinion, it would make much more sense to just share it. If you weren't planning on sharing the method, then you shouldn't have made the thread.
 
JustinTimeCuber said:
Why the **** aren't you posting the method? It is a method for solving a Rubik's Cube. It isn't that important, tbh. Interesting, but not important. It's not like you just combined General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics. In my opinion, it would make much more sense to just share it. If you weren't planning on sharing the method, then you shouldn't have made the thread.
Click to expand...

You can't be serious, can you? This is a very interesting discovery in the field of computer software algorithms and I think it could also be interesting in the field of Group Theory in maths. He wants to publish it in a certain way and his discovery is probably much more than what you will ever be able to do in cubing.
 
I'm very curious about the method, so good luck publishing it. It will probably be most useful for mathematics, as far as I can tell, and might have some additional uses which would be great! It is rather disappointing that some people here act hostile, as if what you are saying is true, its impressive. However, if after many unsuccesful attempts, it would seem that the method is not suitable to be tought as a course, i do hope you follow the suggestions of the people here that are the group of people most interested in the subject, and publish it for the community. Good luck :)
 
Maybe if you could just share a sample solution or two like with Per's commutator challenge. Then we could have a better understanding and you won't have to reveal the secret.
 
DGraciaRubik said:
You can't be serious, can you? This is a very interesting discovery in the field of computer software algorithms and I think it could also be interesting in the field of Group Theory in maths. He wants to publish it in a certain way and his discovery is probably much more than what you will ever be able to do in cubing.
Click to expand...

I never said it wouldn't be interesting, I'm interested, but there's no point in anyone being interested if he won't share it. Also, it's not a computer software algorithm... unless I do not understand the definition of the word 'human'. If he won't give proof that this method actually EXISTS, then I'm gonna be skeptical. 96% of people will believe anything that they are told. (And if you believed that I didn't just make that number up then you are part of the "96%".)

NonnX said:
I'm very curious about the method, so good luck publishing it. It will probably be most useful for mathematics, as far as I can tell, and might have some additional uses which would be great! It is rather disappointing that some people here act hostile, as if what you are saying is true, its impressive. However, if after many unsuccesful attempts, it would seem that the method is not suitable to be tought as a course, i do hope you follow the suggestions of the people here that are the group of people most interested in the subject, and publish it for the community. Good luck :)
Click to expand...

The reason some people are acting hostile towards him is that generally when someone posts with "<method> created", they post the method. ~90% of the respondents to the poll said that they were interested. It's just frustrating, because it sounds like he already created the method and is just sitting on it. Does he expect over a hundred people to go to a course to learn about a method that he could have just posted? Honestly, if you are never going to actually post the method, then I don't care anymore.

There are still people who wonder why some people are skeptical that the method even exists. It has been over six months since this thread started. Why can't you (Christopher Mowla) just post it, or at least proof that it even exists?
 
Last edited:
As a former university lecturer, I can tell you that no college will be interested in this as a course until they can see a sustainable demand for it from students.

Publishing your book is a good idea though. You can try going through a publisher, but be warned that it will be difficult to get a publisher interested in such a niche topic. Personally, I'd go the self publishing route, but you should be aware that it will take a bit of financial investment from you to get going.

The other option is, if your method is mathematical enough, and contains a few theorems and proofs, as you say it does, then perhaps a better idea is to see about publishing in a peer reviewed journal. There are many journals that deal with group theory, etc, and your findings sound like they would be appropriate in one of those journals.

Lastly, don't expect to make money off of this. Contrary to popular belief, even scientists who make groundbreaking discoveries don't make much money off of them. The money is made in the application of the discovery, not for the discovery itself.
 
You should go to a competition, compete in FMC and post your results here if you're not going to post the method.
That way we'll have proof of the method's existence since I don't think you'll ever post it
 
JustinTimeCuber said:
Why the **** aren't you posting the method? It is a method for solving a Rubik's Cube. It isn't that important, tbh. Interesting, but not important. It's not like you just combined General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics. In my opinion, it would make much more sense to just share it. If you weren't planning on sharing the method, then you shouldn't have made the thread.
Click to expand...

Well, string theory does just that, and he didn't invent it, so...
 
My suggestion is publish a (short) paper on the concept... find anyone who's already published a paper on the cube (maybe start with the people involved in the god-alg project) and see if they'd co-author it with you. Then if you want to make any money off it, self publish the book (digitally).

Expecting to teach it anywhere is just being unrealistic.
Anyway, good luck, I'm looking forward to reading about it.
 
An example solve wouldn't be helpful without a step-by-step explanation, which may give away some of the method.
I don't see an example solve being a possibility, for the people asking.
 
Hazel said:
It's been over 7 years since the last post to this thread. Have there been any updates on this method? I find it troubling that so much time has passed without a proper introduction either here or elsewhere, would love to hear from Christopher.
Click to expand...
This is a big bump yo. Please be careful about bumping threads.

@christopermowla any updates?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

FineGeoduck2211
Pseudo 6 Simul (P6S) Thread
Replies
7
Views
1,272
00010002GD
0
O
Update: Added F2LEO and Pseudo F2LEO solvers to the website.
Replies
13
Views
4,217
Swagrid
Swagrid
NebraskanSpeedsolver
Help with Pseudo Slotting? (That became a convo about ducks lol)
Replies
19
Views
2,030
Gecko777
Gecko777
V
Pseudo F2l
Replies
9
Views
1,319
ruffleduck
ruffleduck
J
3x3 Pseudo-Cross
Replies
4
Views
1,726
IsThatA4x4
IsThatA4x4
Back
Top