• Welcome to the Speedsolving.com, home of the web's largest puzzle community!
    You are currently viewing our forum as a guest which gives you limited access to join discussions and access our other features.

    Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community of 35,000+ people from around the world today!

    If you are already a member, simply login to hide this message and begin participating in the community!

SALOW Notation for Curvy Copter.

Would you support Curvy Copter as an event?

  • Yes

    Votes: 22 73.3%
  • No

    Votes: 8 26.7%

  • Total voters
    30
Joined
Apr 1, 2017
Messages
1,132
Likes
403
Location
Galar Region
WCA
2015MANN01
YouTube
Aerma
#21
So RF++ is the opposite of RF-, and RF-- is the opposite of RF+? So would it be possible to call RF++ RF-' and RF-- RF+'?
In a jumbled position this might not be the case though? Like in the part of a scramble where you're jumblind the cube, FR++ could be different from FR which could be different from FR+ , which could differ from FR-
 
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
66
Likes
41
#22
Two partial turns would, using R/L, U/D, F/B Order, would be, in your case: RF. However, in reconstruction, where someone would do two F+ moves, it would be RF+ RF+.
I just checked this and two partial turns is not equal to 180
 
Joined
Oct 17, 2017
Messages
176
Likes
76
Location
Here
WCA
2018OLSE04
#23
So RF++ is the opposite of RF-, and RF-- is the opposite of RF+? So would it be possible to call RF++ RF-' and RF-- RF+'?
Sure you could call them that, but RF-' certainly makes less sense than RF++ since RF++ would denote a ~110 degree clockwise turn.
In a jumbled position this might not be the case though? Like in the part of a scramble where you're jumblind the cube, FR++ could be different from FR which could be different from FR+ , which could differ from FR-
Yes, it should be normal for all of these to be distinct legal moves (as they are when the cube is in the solved state).
 
Joined
Dec 13, 2015
Messages
748
Likes
372
Location
New York
Thread starter #24
In a jumbled position this might not be the case though? Like in the part of a scramble where you're jumblind the cube, FR++ could be different from FR which could be different from FR+ , which could differ from FR-
This is true.

I'm guessing it can go like this: (neutral), RF+, RF--/RF+', RF, RF++/RF-', RF-,(neutral)?
 
Joined
Jun 18, 2019
Messages
310
Likes
156
Location
Taipei, Taiwan
WCA
2018LINW02
#28
A have an idea: Since this notation is kind of like Old Megaminx notation, maybe we can improve it just like Megaminx.......

Hold one corner and do moves like wide R2 and D2 only, like Megaminx.
 
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
66
Likes
41
#29
Basically if you have a solved cube and you turn the FR edge it would go FR+,FR++,FR(180 degrees), FR- -, FR -, original state
 
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
66
Likes
41
#30
A have an idea: Since this notation is kind of like Old Megaminx notation, maybe we can improve it just like Megaminx.......

Hold one corner and do moves like wide R2 and D2 only, like Megaminx.
I have played around with that already and I don’t think that’s the way to go. Especially with jumbling. That would make it really awkward to do jumbling scrambles. I think Sion so far has the best solution for the jumbling notation of +/-
 
Joined
Dec 13, 2015
Messages
748
Likes
372
Location
New York
Thread starter #31
Basically if you have a silver cube and you turn the FR edge it would go FR+,FR++,FR(180 degrees), FR- -, FR -, original state
While I like R++, I still think calling R++ R-' makes more sense since it is the positional inverse of R-, kind of like how U' is the inverse of U on 3x3.
 
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
66
Likes
41
#32
While I like R++, I still think calling R++ R-' makes more sense since it is the positional inverse of R-, kind of like how U' is the inverse of U on 3x3.
I understand it’s the positional inverse, but I think it needs to be ++ because if you only go by the position of the edge it’s the same but the four petals around each turning edge would be in different locations. Also as a side note I think it would look weird to have +’ since megamimx already uses ++. But from a scrambling point it would be identically if you’re just going for the manipulation of shape after doing some initial scramble to put the cube in a random state before jumbling.
 
Joined
Dec 13, 2015
Messages
748
Likes
372
Location
New York
Thread starter #33
I understand it’s the positional inverse, but I think it needs to be ++ because if you only go by the position of the edge it’s the same but the four petals around each turning edge would be in different locations. Also as a side note I think it would look weird to have +’ since megamimx already uses ++. But from a scrambling point it would be identically if you’re just going for the manipulation of shape after doing some initial scramble to put the cube in a random state before jumbling.

Perhaps we could use forward and back slashes, so it could be RF/, RF//, RF, R\\, R\, which could differentiate CC from Mega, especially since something like F+ is completely different from F.
 
Joined
Apr 1, 2017
Messages
1,132
Likes
403
Location
Galar Region
WCA
2015MANN01
YouTube
Aerma
#34
I understand it’s the positional inverse, but I think it needs to be ++ because if you only go by the position of the edge it’s the same but the four petals around each turning edge would be in different locations. Also as a side note I think it would look weird to have +’ since megamimx already uses ++. But from a scrambling point it would be identically if you’re just going for the manipulation of shape after doing some initial scramble to put the cube in a random state before jumbling.
If I understand this correct, I agree. So hypothetically in jumbled states these might all be different moves: FR, FR+, FR++, FR-, FR--
 
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
66
Likes
41
#35
If I understand this correct, I agree. So hypothetically in jumbled states these might all be different moves: FR, FR+, FR++, FR-, FR--
Yeah. I’m not completely sure as I never messed with jumbling. But in theory those moves could potentially swap different petal pieces so I think notation definitely needs to be specific
 
Top