I just finished the 3^5 cube, and I hope I have attached the log file=20
correctly to an email to roice@gravitation3d.com
(If not, how do I do this??).
Roice, you are to be congratulated. This is a huge beast, but an=20
incredibly beautiful one. I urge everyone to tackle it: you will not=20
regret the experience (oh, and the view from up here looks amazing :)
Hey, congratulations! That's beyond amazing to have solved a 5D cube. I
haven't even solved the 4D version!
You did right by sending your log file to Roice and I see that he's
added you to the hall-of-insanity though I don't see your log file
listed there.
BTW, even though you have clearly conquered Everest, there are still
higher peaks waiting for the first person to conquer them too! ;-)
-Melinda
markoram109 wrote:
> I just finished the 3^5 cube, and I hope I have attached the log file
> correctly to an email to roice@gravitation3d.com
>
> (If not, how do I do this??).
>
> Roice, you are to be congratulated. This is a huge beast, but an
> incredibly beautiful one. I urge everyone to tackle it: you will not
> regret the experience (oh, and the view from up here looks amazing :)
Melinda,
Thank-you very much for your kind words of support: these really=20
make all the difference for me in these crazy undertakings :)=20
Certainly there are many higher peaks out there: Olympus Mons, on=20
the planet Mars, is 3x higher than Everest for a start, and I think=20
there are cliffs on Miranda (a moon of Uranus) even higher. So as=20
you say there are always new peaks to aim for. Still, I'm not sure=20
I'll be emabrking on any of these new challenges just yet....
What I will be doing soon is expanding just a little on how this=20
solution worked out for me, with the hope that it will be useful=20
(and inspiring?!) for anyone else attempting to solve any of the 5-D=20
versions.
Mark.
--- In 4D_Cubing@yahoogroups.com, Melinda Green
>
> Hey, congratulations! That's beyond amazing to have solved a 5D=20
cube. I=20
> haven't even solved the 4D version!
> You did right by sending your log file to Roice and I see that=20
he's=20
> added you to the hall-of-insanity though I don't see your log file=20
> listed there.
> BTW, even though you have clearly conquered Everest, there are=20
still=20
> higher peaks waiting for the first person to conquer them too! ;-)
> -Melinda
>=20
> markoram109 wrote:
> > I just finished the 3^5 cube, and I hope I have attached the log=20
file=20
> > correctly to an email to roice@...
> >
> > (If not, how do I do this??).
> >
> > Roice, you are to be congratulated. This is a huge beast, but an=20
> > incredibly beautiful one. I urge everyone to tackle it: you will=20
not=20
> > regret the experience (oh, and the view from up here looks=20
amazing :)
>
------=_NextPart_000_000D_01C7D923.218C6400
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Great job Mark. Welcome on the board. So... There is now 9 people who manag=
ed with 5D cube. Nice! Lately I was joking with Michal Wizner that there sh=
ould be deal with Roice: If all 5D cubes be solved (from 2^5 to 5^5) Roice =
should start working on creating 6D cube but not before. I think it is good=
deal. My laptop has problems with 4^5 (1,6 Ghz, 0,5 GB RAM) so we can slee=
p well not troubled by existance of 6D rubik cube:)
As you pointed Mark:
"I ended up hiding the +U, -U and +V faces, and setting the parameters
of the 5-D version to give a representation similar to the 4-D cube projec=
tion.=20
This I found workable, whereas other settings made everything too confusing=
."
In my first concept of 5D cube I put +U and -U disconnected from the cube a=
nd hanging next to it (and I've moved +V down -> changing projection into u=
nfolded cube).=20
When you start with default view in MC5D it is really hard to get started w=
ith solving. I did the same settings (and as far as I know others the same)=
and in one case just suggesting setting like this let this person solving =
the whole cube in less than 2 weeks).=20
I even suggested two defaults views. Maybe Roice you consider this in the f=
uture version.
Maybe we could consider 4D version of others puzzles? Pyraminx 4D :) for ex=
ample.
Keep hypersolving,
RemiQ
------=_NextPart_000_000D_01C7D923.218C6400
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
| 12px Courier New, Courier, monotype.com; padding: 3px; background: #ffffff;= |
Mark,
When I spoke about still-higher peaks I was still talking about the
metaphoric types. Most specifically, there are still the 5^4 and the
seductively symmetric 5^5 still waiting to be climbed. Judging from your
description of the difficulty of solving the 3^5 I still stand by my
prediction that we're likely to see exactly one solution to the 5^5. It
sounds like it could take most of a year to accomplish that and it's
hard to imagine more than one person finishing it unless perhaps we end
up with a race. Either way it sounds awful but remember, any first
solution will only happen once! ;-)
Thank you for your description of the process. It made it possible for
me to get an idea of how one might actually solve a 5D cube which until
now just seemed like a miracle.
-Melinda
markoram109 wrote:
> Melinda,
>
> Thank-you very much for your kind words of support: these really
> make all the difference for me in these crazy undertakings :)
>
> Certainly there are many higher peaks out there: Olympus Mons, on
> the planet Mars, is 3x higher than Everest for a start, and I think
> there are cliffs on Miranda (a moon of Uranus) even higher. So as
> you say there are always new peaks to aim for. Still, I'm not sure
> I'll be emabrking on any of these new challenges just yet....
>
> What I will be doing soon is expanding just a little on how this
> solution worked out for me, with the hope that it will be useful
> (and inspiring?!) for anyone else attempting to solve any of the 5-D
> versions.
>
>
> Mark.
>
>
>
> --- In 4D_Cubing@yahoogroups.com, Melinda Green
>
>> Hey, congratulations! That's beyond amazing to have solved a 5D cube. I haven't even solved the 4D version!
>> You did right by sending your log file to Roice and I see that he's added you to the hall-of-insanity though I don't see your log file
>> listed there. BTW, even though you have clearly conquered Everest, there are still higher peaks waiting for the first person to conquer them too! ;-)
>> -Melinda
>
Melinda,
I too had the peaks in mind metaphorically. After all,
if one likens the 3^5 to Everest, one needs other
names to invoke for the 4^5 and 5^5, or n^6 etc.
Perhaps humans will walk on the REAL Olympus Mons
before a 3^6 solution exists??
I have no doubt that you, or anyone else reading this,
could solve the 3^5, or other variants, if you wanted
to. Maybe the question then becomes (in the interests
of starting a possible discussion) to what practical
use if any could these accomplishments be put?
--- Melinda Green
> Mark,
>
> When I spoke about still-higher peaks I was still
> talking about the
> metaphoric types. Most specifically, there are still
> the 5^4 and the
> seductively symmetric 5^5 still waiting to be
> climbed. Judging from your
> description of the difficulty of solving the 3^5 I
> still stand by my
> prediction that we're likely to see exactly one
> solution to the 5^5. It
> sounds like it could take most of a year to
> accomplish that and it's
> hard to imagine more than one person finishing it
> unless perhaps we end
> up with a race. Either way it sounds awful but
> remember, any first
> solution will only happen once! ;-)
>
> Thank you for your description of the process. It
> made it possible for
> me to get an idea of how one might actually solve a
> 5D cube which until
> now just seemed like a miracle.
>
> -Melinda
>
> markoram109 wrote:
> > Melinda,
> >
> > Thank-you very much for your kind words of
> support: these really
> > make all the difference for me in these crazy
> undertakings :)
> >
> > Certainly there are many higher peaks out there:
> Olympus Mons, on
> > the planet Mars, is 3x higher than Everest for a
> start, and I think
> > there are cliffs on Miranda (a moon of Uranus)
> even higher. So as
> > you say there are always new peaks to aim for.
> Still, I'm not sure
> > I'll be emabrking on any of these new challenges
> just yet....
> >
> > What I will be doing soon is expanding just a
> little on how this
> > solution worked out for me, with the hope that it
> will be useful
> > (and inspiring?!) for anyone else attempting to
> solve any of the 5-D
> > versions.
> >
> >
> > Mark.
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In 4D_Cubing@yahoogroups.com, Melinda Green
>
> >
> >> Hey, congratulations! That's beyond amazing to
> have solved a 5D cube. I haven't even solved the 4D
> version!
> >> You did right by sending your log file to Roice
> and I see that he's added you to the
> hall-of-insanity though I don't see your log file
> >> listed there. BTW, even though you have clearly
> conquered Everest, there are still higher peaks
> waiting for the first person to conquer them too!
> ;-)
> >> -Melinda
> >
>
___________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Answers - Got a question? Someone out there knows the answer. Try it
now.
http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/
I think the practical skills required to solve these puzzles without
help are the same needed to solve any complex problem. That is the
ability to systematically break a large problem down into a series of
smaller ones.
Maybe someone will solve a 6D cube before too long. I suspect that is
probably inevitable. My real question is whether that will be very fun.
Maybe what we really need is a breakthrough in UI design that will allow
sufficiently patient humans to solve cubes of any number of dimensions.
I have difficulty imagining what might look like but I would not be
surprised if the general design of such an interface might also be
usefully applied to other very practical searching and optimizing
problems. I would doubt that it would look like the MC4D interface but
then I would not have guessed that a workable 5D version could be based
on our design but clearly I was wrong. Perhaps with enough controls to
show and hide carefully selected parts of the puzzles, a true
n-dimensional UI really could be based on our design. I just don't know.
-Melinda
Mark Oram wrote:
> Melinda,
>
> I too had the peaks in mind metaphorically. After all,
> if one likens the 3^5 to Everest, one needs other
> names to invoke for the 4^5 and 5^5, or n^6 etc.
> Perhaps humans will walk on the REAL Olympus Mons
> before a 3^6 solution exists??
>
> I have no doubt that you, or anyone else reading this,
> could solve the 3^5, or other variants, if you wanted
> to. Maybe the question then becomes (in the interests
> of starting a possible discussion) to what practical
> use if any could these accomplishments be put?
>
>
>
>
> --- Melinda Green
>
>
>> Mark,
>>
>> When I spoke about still-higher peaks I was still
>> talking about the
>> metaphoric types. Most specifically, there are still
>> the 5^4 and the
>> seductively symmetric 5^5 still waiting to be
>> climbed. Judging from your
>> description of the difficulty of solving the 3^5 I
>> still stand by my
>> prediction that we're likely to see exactly one
>> solution to the 5^5. It
>> sounds like it could take most of a year to
>> accomplish that and it's
>> hard to imagine more than one person finishing it
>> unless perhaps we end
>> up with a race. Either way it sounds awful but
>> remember, any first
>> solution will only happen once! ;-)
>>
>> Thank you for your description of the process. It
>> made it possible for
>> me to get an idea of how one might actually solve a
>> 5D cube which until
>> now just seemed like a miracle.
>>
>> -Melinda
>>
>> markoram109 wrote:
>>
>>> Melinda,
>>>
>>> Thank-you very much for your kind words of
>>>
>> support: these really
>>
>>> make all the difference for me in these crazy
>>>
>> undertakings :)
>>
>>> Certainly there are many higher peaks out there:
>>>
>> Olympus Mons, on
>>
>>> the planet Mars, is 3x higher than Everest for a
>>>
>> start, and I think
>>
>>> there are cliffs on Miranda (a moon of Uranus)
>>>
>> even higher. So as
>>
>>> you say there are always new peaks to aim for.
>>>
>> Still, I'm not sure
>>
>>> I'll be emabrking on any of these new challenges
>>>
>> just yet....
>>
>>> What I will be doing soon is expanding just a
>>>
>> little on how this
>>
>>> solution worked out for me, with the hope that it
>>>
>> will be useful
>>
>>> (and inspiring?!) for anyone else attempting to
>>>
>> solve any of the 5-D
>>
>>> versions.
>>>
>>>
>>> Mark.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --- In 4D_Cubing@yahoogroups.com, Melinda Green
>>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Hey, congratulations! That's beyond amazing to
>>>>
>> have solved a 5D cube. I haven't even solved the 4D
>> version!
>>
>>>> You did right by sending your log file to Roice
>>>>
>> and I see that he's added you to the
>> hall-of-insanity though I don't see your log file
>>
>>>> listed there. BTW, even though you have clearly
>>>>
>> conquered Everest, there are still higher peaks
>> waiting for the first person to conquer them too!
>> ;-)
>>
>>>> -Melinda
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
> ___________________________________________________________
> Yahoo! Answers - Got a question? Someone out there knows the answer. Try it
> now.
> http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>