--------------040501050907010308050403
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello Ryan, and welcome to our group!
I hadn't realized that yours was a custom solution. That is very=20
impressive! It's still impressive when people follow Roice's solution,=20
but you earn a special sort of respect when you develop your own solution.
20 second 3x3 solutions are very fast! Are you old enough to remember=20
when the world record was approaching 1 minute? At my best I could do it=20
in around 5 minutes, so sub-one minute solves are magic to me, and=20
sub-10 second solves are miraculous. We've done some 4D speedsolving=20
competitions which were quite fun. If you get interested in that, we can=20
try to get enough people to do more.
Have you explored any of the graph theoretic aspects of twisty puzzles?=20
It seems right up your alley. I'm guessing that you are interested in=20
machine learning, is that right? I'm wondering what sort of things you=20
most want to work on.
Happy puzzling!
-Melinda
On 3/7/2015 4:58 PM, ryan@echolsphoto.com [4D_Cubing] wrote:
> [Attachment(s) <#TopText> from ryan@echolsphoto.com [4D_Cubing]=20
> included below]
>
> Hello everybody!
> My name is Ryan Echols. I'm 17 years old (turning 18 later this=20
> month), and currently a first-year student BYU in Provo, Utah,=20
> studying Math. For fun, I like to speedsolve the Rubik's cube, roller=20
> blade, play accordion, do a few card tricks, program, and play Portal=20
> 2. My typical time on a standard Rubik's cube is 20 seconds, and I=20
> mention Portal 2 because I was at once a co-world-record holder (the=20
> record has long since been broken, but I'm still top 100 in multiple=20
> places on the global leaderboards). For work, I'm a research assistant=20
> in the Math department with a group that's currently looking at=20
> algorithms to make good Tree Decompositions in Spectral Graph Theory.
> As for solving the MC4D, I had quite a fun time. I downloaded it=20
> early on February 12th, and had bee working on it now and then in my=20
> free time for the last 3 weeks until yesterday, March 6th, when I=20
> finally finished it. I used no macros, but of course I did use=20
> algorithms I knew from the standard Rubik's cube.
> So, here comes a long-winded explanation of how I solved it. Don't=20
> feel obligated to read this if you don't want to. I've attached my=20
> .log file if you'd like to follow along. anyway, Here we go:
> My overall approach was similar to F2L (but, more like "first two=20
> nested cubes"), with the last cube being solved a bit like Petrus. I=20
> started mostly on the red cube, building it in blocks like 2x2x2,=20
> then 2x2x3, and 3x3x2, but as I did so, I didn't only solve the=20
> adjacent faces on adjacent cubes, I also solved the next layer out on=20
> the adjacent cubes. To solve the last ("upper") layer on the red cube=20
> (corresponding to the brown cube), I began thinking about it as=20
> starting to solve the brown cube. I built up the brown cube in an F2L=20
> fashion, which in turn solved the last layer of the red cube. The=20
> particulars of solving F2L of the brown cube were intriguing, though.=20
> I'd rotate the totally untouched "middle blue" or "mBlue" cube=20
> (opposite red) as to get the desired piece of the brown cube so that=20
> it had the brown colored cublet in the over-all brown cube. From that=20
> point, I'd one-by-one do 3 or 4 cube turns that each a mounted to a=20
> single face turn on the brown cube, as if the brown cube was a typical=20
> Rubik's cube. I did this by rotating one of the cubes adjacent to=20
> brown so that the face of brown in question would slide up onto the=20
> untouched mBlue cube, then I'd rotate the mBlue cube (with the brown=20
> face on it) in the way that would rotate the brown face as desired,=20
> then I'd undo the first cube's turn, putting the brown face back on=20
> the brown cube in its new orientation. In certain cases, reversing the=20
> turn done to the mBlue cube was necessary also.
> With the F2L of the brown cube solved, all that was left was the=20
> mBlue cube (and the attached adjacent faces of 6 other cubes). At this=20
> point, I had to take a step back and think about some theory. Each=20
> cube exists in 3 dimensions, of course. our space has 4. In our=20
> "flattened-to-3D" representation, let's suppose our center cube exists=20
> in x,y,z. The adjacent cubes sharing the two x,y faces would then=20
> exist in x,y,w. The adjacent cubes sharing the two x,z faces would=20
> then exist in x,z,w. Likewise, the adjacent cubes sharing the two y,z=20
> faces would exist in y,z,w. The totally opposite cube is also in=20
> x,y,z. If we only look at the 6 cubes that do exist in z, but ignore=20
> z, they make up the faces of just a cube. I call this mindset a=20
> "dimension squash". In this case, we squashed z. So, if we dimension=20
> squash z, the mBlue cube becomes like the last, unsolved 3rd layer of=20
> a normal Rubik's cube. Of course, any different pieces on the m Blue=20
> cube that are in the same x,y spot, but not z, will all act as one as=20
> we ignore z. So, I solved the mBlue cube in a Petrus fashion for the=20
> start, then just three or four LL algorithms for the last layer, using=20
> temporary setup moves and dimension-squashing the various 3 dimensions=20
> of the mBlue cube. The specifics of that were the hardest part to=20
> figure out.
> Anyway, thanks for welcoming me to the community!
> -Ryan Echols
>
>
>=20
--------------040501050907010308050403
Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
--------------010301070807080200000505
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
This group is quite varied, including puzzle builders, puzzle solvers,=20
4D enthusiasts, and pure math types in a number of fields. You are=20
encouraged to post on any subject even tangentially related to higher=20
dimensions and/or puzzles.
Here is a link to the results of our first 4D speedsolving contest:=20
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/4D_Cubing/conversations/messages/1164 W=
e=20
ran it over Yahoo chat. I'd create a scrambled file and share it with=20
the group who would solve it and email the result. The winner is the=20
first correct solution that arrives in my in-box.
I believe it was a no-macro contest? We could try another one allowing=20
macros, or any other variation people like. I'll hold a contest whenever=20
there are 4 or more people ready to compete. So, a quick poll: How many=20
of you would like to do this again soon, and if so, what dates/times are=20
good for you and which puzzles and programs do you prefer. I'd like to=20
keep this to just MC4D solutions but am flexible.
-Melinda
On 3/9/2015 6:42 PM, ryan@echolsphoto.com [4D_Cubing] wrote:
>
>
> Melinda,
> I started cubing in 2005 when I was 8, using the keyhole method,=20
> and I quickly slimmed my times down to a minute or so with that=20
> method. I was introduced to the real speedsolving community In 2008=20
> when I went to my first competition, and that was when the 3x3 WR=20
> was around 9 seconds. Any times less than 14 seconds are still magical=20
> to me, even though my personal best is 13.5 seconds. I don't know how=20
> that happened.
> Anyway, 4D speedsolving sounds like quite a bit of fun =3D) I'd be=20
> interested to learn the specifics of competitions. Would they be=20
> time-based, or turn-based? Macros, or no? Anyway, let me know when we=20
> may be having one.
> I've only given minimum thought to the graph theory of twisty=20
> puzzles. There'd be incredible symmetry on all the graphs, of course.=20
> As for Machine Learning, I have absolutely no experience in the field,=20
> but I love the idea of the field. Does this group work largely on=20
> furthering knowledge on puzzle theory?
> Thanks,
> -Ryan Echols
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [MC4D] Introducing myself
> From: "Melinda Green melinda@superliminal.com
>
> <4D_Cubing@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Sun, March 08, 2015 8:04 pm
> To: 4D_Cubing@yahoogroups.com
>
> Hello Ryan, and welcome to our group!
>
> I hadn't realized that yours was a custom solution. That is very
> impressive! It's still impressive when people follow Roice's
> solution, but you earn a special sort of respect when you develop
> your own solution.
>
> 20 second 3x3 solutions are very fast! Are you old enough to
> remember when the world record was approaching 1 minute? At my
> best I could do it in around 5 minutes, so sub-one minute solves
> are magic to me, and sub-10 second solves are miraculous. We've
> done some 4D speedsolving competitions which were quite fun. If
> you get interested in that, we can try to get enough people to do
> more.
>
> Have you explored any of the graph theoretic aspects of twisty
> puzzles? It seems right up your alley. I'm guessing that you are
> interested in machine learning, is that right? I'm wondering what
> sort of things you most want to work on.
>
> Happy puzzling!
> -Melinda
>
> On 3/7/2015 4:58 PM, ryan@echolsphoto.com [4D_Cubing] wrote:
>> Hello everybody!
>> My name is Ryan Echols. I'm 17 years old (turning 18 later
>> this month), and currently a first-year student BYU in Provo,
>> Utah, studying Math. For fun, I like to speedsolve the Rubik's
>> cube, roller blade, play accordion, do a few card tricks,
>> program, and play Portal 2. My typical time on a standard Rubik's
>> cube is 20 seconds, and I mention Portal 2 because I was at once
>> a co-world-record holder (the record has long since been broken,
>> but I'm still top 100 in multiple places on the global
>> leaderboards). For work, I'm a research assistant in the Math
>> department with a group that's currently looking at algorithms to
>> make good Tree Decompositions in Spectral Graph Theory.
>> As for solving the MC4D, I had quite a fun time. I downloaded
>> it early on February 12th, and had bee working on it now and then
>> in my free time for the last 3 weeks until yesterday, March 6th,
>> when I finally finished it. I used no macros, but of course I did
>> use algorithms I knew from the standard Rubik's cube.
>> So, here comes a long-winded explanation of how I solved it.
>> Don't feel obligated to read this if you don't want to. I've
>> attached my .log file if you'd like to follow along. anyway, Here
>> we go:
>> My overall approach was similar to F2L (but, more like "first
>> two nested cubes"), with the last cube being solved a bit like
>> Petrus. I started mostly on the red cube, building it in blocks
>> like 2x2x2, then 2x2x3, and 3x3x2, but as I did so, I didn't only
>> solve the adjacent faces on adjacent cubes, I also solved the
>> next layer out on the adjacent cubes. To solve the last ("upper")
>> layer on the red cube (corresponding to the brown cube), I began
>> thinking about it as starting to solve the brown cube. I built up
>> the brown cube in an F2L fashion, which in turn solved the last
>> layer of the red cube. The particulars of solving F2L of the
>> brown cube were intriguing, though. I'd rotate the totally
>> untouched "middle blue" or "mBlue" cube (opposite red) as to get
>> the desired piece of the brown cube so that it had the brown
>> colored cublet in the over-all brown cube. From that point, I'd
>> one-by-one do 3 or 4 cube turns that each a mounted to a single
>> face turn on the brown cube, as if the brown cube was a typical
>> Rubik's cube. I did this by rotating one of the cubes adjacent to
>> brown so that the face of brown in question would slide up onto
>> the untouched mBlue cube, then I'd rotate the mBlue cube (with
>> the brown face on it) in the way that would rotate the brown face
>> as desired, then I'd undo the first cube's turn, putting the
>> brown face back on the brown cube in its new orientation. In
>> certain cases, reversing the turn done to the mBlue cube was
>> necessary also.
>> With the F2L of the brown cube solved, all that was left was
>> the mBlue cube (and the attached adjacent faces of 6 other
>> cubes). At this point, I had to take a step back and think about
>> some theory. Each cube exists in 3 dimensions, of course. our
>> space has 4. In our "flattened-to-3D" representation, let's
>> suppose our center cube exists in x,y,z. The adjacent cubes
>> sharing the two x,y faces would then exist in x,y,w. The adjacent
>> cubes sharing the two x,z faces would then exist in x,z,w.
>> Likewise, the adjacent cubes sharing the two y,z faces would
>> exist in y,z,w. The totally opposite cube is also in x,y,z. If we
>> only look at the 6 cubes that do exist in z, but ignore z, they
>> make up the faces of just a cube. I call this mindset a
>> "dimension squash". In this case, we squashed z. So, if we
>> dimension squash z, the mBlue cube becomes like the last,
>> unsolved 3rd layer of a normal Rubik's cube. Of course, any
>> different pieces on the m Blue cube that are in the same x,y
>> spot, but not z, will all act as one as we ignore z. So, I solved
>> the mBlue cube in a Petrus fashion for the start, then just three
>> or four LL algorithms for the last layer, using temporary setup
>> moves and dimension-squashing the various 3 dimensions of the
>> mBlue cube. The specifics of that were the hardest part to figure
>> out.
>> Anyway, thanks for welcoming me to the community!
>> -Ryan Echols
>
>
>
>=20
--------------010301070807080200000505
Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
">
This group is quite varied, including puzzle builders, puzzle
solvers, 4D enthusiasts, and pure math types in a number of fields.
You are encouraged to post on any subject even tangentially related
to higher dimensions and/or puzzles.
Here is a link to the results of our first 4D speedsolving contest:
/groups/4D_Cubing/conversations/messages/1164">https://groups.yahoo.com/neo=
/groups/4D_Cubing/conversations/messages/1164
We ran it over Yahoo chat. I'd create a scrambled file and share it
with the group who would solve it and email the result. The winner
is the first correct solution that arrives in my in-box.
I believe it was a no-macro contest? We could try another one
allowing macros, or any other variation people like. I'll hold a
contest whenever there are 4 or more people ready to compete. So, a
quick poll: How many of you would like to do this again soon, and if
so, what dates/times are good for you and which puzzles and programs
do you prefer. I'd like to keep this to just MC4D solutions but am
flexible.
-Melinda
email09.secureserver.net"
type=3D"cite">
=20=20=20=20=20=20
as 8, using the
keyhole method, and I quickly slimmed my times down to a
minute or so with that method. I=C2=A0was introduced to the=C2=A0=
real
speedsolving community=C2=A0In 2008 when I went to my=C2=A0first
competition,=C2=A0and that was when the 3x3 WR was=C2=A0around
9=C2=A0seconds. Any times less than 14 seconds are still magical =
to
me, even though my personal best is 13.5 seconds. I don't know
how that happened.
ite a bit of fun
=3D) I'd be interested to learn the specifics of competitions.
Would they be time-based, or turn-based? Macros, or no?
Anyway, let me know when we may be having one.
graph theory of
twisty puzzles.=C2=A0There'd be incredible symmetry on all the
graphs, of course. As for Machine Learning, I have absolutely
no experience in the field, but I love the idea of the field.
Does this group work largely on furthering knowledge on puzzle
theory?
FONT-FAMILY: verdana; COLOR: black; PADDING-LEFT: 8px;
MARGIN-LEFT: 8px; BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid" webmail=3D"1">
Subject: Re: [MC4D] Introducing myself
From: "Melinda Green href=3D"mailto:melinda@superliminal.com">melinda@superliminal=
.com
[4D_Cubing]"
< href=3D"mailto:4D_Cubing@yahoogroups.com">4D_Cubing@yahoogrou=
ps.com>
Date: Sun, March 08, 2015 8:04 pm
To: href=3D"mailto:4D_Cubing@yahoogroups.com">4D_Cubing@yahoogrou=
ps.com
=C2=A0
I hadn't realized that yours was a custom solution.
That is very impressive! It's still impressive when
people follow Roice's solution, but you earn a
special sort of respect when you develop your own
solution.
20 second 3x3 solutions are very fast! Are you old
enough to remember when the world record was
approaching 1 minute? At my best I could do it in
around 5 minutes, so sub-one minute solves are magic
to me, and sub-10 second solves are miraculous.
We've done some 4D speedsolving competitions which
were quite fun. If you get interested in that, we
can try to get enough people to do more.
Have you explored any of the graph theoretic aspects
of twisty puzzles? It seems right up your alley. I'm
guessing that you are interested in machine
learning, is that right? I'm wondering what sort of
things you most want to work on.
Happy puzzling!
-Melinda
class=3D"moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href=3D"mailto:ryan@echolsphoto.com"
target=3D"_blank">ryan@echolsphoto.com
[4D_Cubing] wrote:
email09.secureserver.net"
type=3D"cite"> FONT-FAMILY: Verdana; COLOR: #000000">
. I'm 17 years
old (turning 18 later this month), and
currently a first-year student BYU in Provo,
Utah, studying Math. For fun, I like to
speedsolve the Rubik's cube, roller blade,
play accordion, do a few card tricks, program,
and play Portal 2. My typical time on a
standard Rubik's cube is 20 seconds, and I
mention Portal 2 because I was at once a
co-world-record holder (the record has long
since been broken, but I'm still top 100 in
multiple places on the global leaderboards).
For work, I'm a research assistant in the Math
department with a group that's currently
looking at algorithms to make good Tree
Decompositions in Spectral Graph Theory.
D, I had quite a
fun time. I downloaded it early on February
12th, and had bee working on it now and then
in my free time for the last 3 weeks until
yesterday, March 6th, when I finally finished
it. I used no macros, but of course I did use
algorithms I knew from the standard Rubik's
cube.
winded
explanation of how I solved it. Don't feel
obligated to read this if you don't want to.
I've attached my .log file if you'd like to
follow along. anyway, Here we go:
s similar to F2L
(but, more like "first two nested cubes"),
with the last cube being solved a bit like
Petrus. I started mostly on the red cube,
building it in blocks like 2x2x2, then=C2=A02x2x3=
,
and 3x3x2, but as I did so, I didn't only
solve the adjacent=C2=A0faces on adjacent cubes, =
I
also solved the next layer out on the adjacent
cubes.=C2=A0To solve=C2=A0the last ("upper") laye=
r on
the red cube (corresponding to the brown
cube), I began thinking about it as starting
to solve the brown cube. I built up the brown
cube in an F2L fashion, which in turn solved
the last layer of the red cube. The
particulars of solving F2L of=C2=A0the brown cube
were intriguing, though. I'd rotate the
totally untouched "middle blue" or "mBlue"
cube (opposite red) as to get the desired
piece of the brown cube so that it had the
brown colored cublet=C2=A0in the over-all brown
cube. From that point, I'd one-by-one do 3 or
4 cube turns that each a mounted to a single
face turn on the brown cube, as if the brown
cube was a typical Rubik's cube. I did this by
rotating one of the cubes adjacent to brown so
that the face of brown in question would slide
up onto the untouched mBlue cube, then I'd
rotate the mBlue cube (with the brown face on
it) in the way that would rotate the brown
face as desired, then I'd undo the first
cube's turn, putting the brown face back on
the brown cube in its new orientation. In
certain cases, reversing the turn done to the
mBlue cube was necessary also.
own cube solved,
all that was left was the mBlue cube (and the
attached adjacent faces of 6 other cubes). At
this point, I had to take a step back and
think about some theory. Each cube exists in 3
dimensions, of course. our space has 4. In our
"flattened-to-3D" representation, let's
suppose our center cube exists in x,y,z. The
adjacent=C2=A0cubes sharing the two=C2=A0x,y face=
s would
then exist in x,y,w. The adjacent cubes
sharing the two x,z faces would then exist in
x,z,w. Likewise, the adjacent cubes sharing
the two y,z faces would exist in y,z,w. The
totally opposite cube is also in x,y,z. If we
only look at the 6 cubes that do exist in z,
but ignore z, they make up the faces of just a
cube. I call this mindset a "dimension
squash". In this case, we squashed z.=C2=A0So, if
we dimension squash=C2=A0z, the mBlue cube become=
s
like the last, unsolved 3rd layer of a normal
Rubik's cube. Of course, any different pieces
on the m Blue cube that are in the same x,y
spot, but not z, will all act as one as we
ignore z. So,=C2=A0I solved the mBlue cube in a
Petrus fashion for the start, then just=C2=A0thre=
e
or four=C2=A0LL algorithms for the last layer,
using temporary=C2=A0setup moves and
dimension-squashing the various 3 dimensions
of the mBlue cube. The specifics of that were
the hardest part to figure out.
coming me to the
community!
=20=20=20=20=20=20
--------------010301070807080200000505--
------=_NextPart_000_003C_01D06574.9F5DCA00
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_001_003D_01D06574.9F60D740"
------=_NextPart_001_003D_01D06574.9F60D740
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
It is not easy at all to find "new colorings" in MagicTile. I once tried it=
with the help of the MagicTile programmer (Nelson). Interested persons can=
get instructions from Nelson. So it is not astonishing that a conceptor of=
new MagicTile puzzles cannot predict what eventually fascinating laws a so=
lver will find in the unexplored world of a newly created MagicTile puzzle.
I have started to solve my 3rd MagicTile this year. It is "MagicTile hyperb=
olic {10,3} 6 color vertex turning 0:0:1". I have already solved tha same p=
uzlle with 12 colors (instaed of 6) about two years ago with 18'000 twists=
. You have to know that MagicTile puzzles can get seriously more difficult =
if you diminish the number of colors because the place for manoeuvers gets =
narrower. "MagicTile hyperbolic {10,3} 6 color vertex turning 0:0:1" has th=
e following pieces: 1-c corner-faces, 3-c vertices, 1-c edge-faces and 1-c =
faces. Correspondingly you can separate the puzzle in four stages. Normally=
the first stages are easier to solve. I have not yet finishes the puzzle. =
But already now as I have solved only 2 of 4 stages I have over 11'000 twis=
ts and plenty of experiences to tell from.
(a) Stage "corner-faces". Despite of the fact that the pieces are 1-colo=
red the solving is not easy at all towards the end. You have to fight again=
st "orbits".
(b) Stage "vertices". Already the counting of the different vertices is n=
ot easy. There are exactly 20 pieces organised as 10 pairs of twins. After =
having constructed macros for a 3-cycle for placing the vertices and for th=
e rotations of a pair of vertices and after having applied those macros I w=
as left with 12 of 20 vertices in a mirrored orientation. To get a mirrorin=
g of two twin vertices you have to interchange the places of the wtin by tr=
aversing the whole puzzle (non-orientable, Klein). I'm very proud to have s=
ucceded to consruct a macro which does the mirroring of 4 vertices together=
with the rotation of another single vertex.
And now I will enjoy the next two stages.=20
In the pictures I show (1) the puzzle with the different kinds of pieces, (=
2) the effect of the cornerface macros, (3) the effect of the vertex macros=
and finally (4) the vertex mirroring.
------=_NextPart_001_003D_01D06574.9F60D740
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
in=20
MagicTile. I once tried it with the help of the MagicTile programmer (Nelso=
n).=20
Interested persons can get instructions from Nelson. So it is not astonishi=
ng=20
that a conceptor of new MagicTile puzzles cannot predict what eventually=20
fascinating laws a solver will find in the unexplored world of a newly crea=
ted=20
MagicTile puzzle."urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
e this=20
year. It is =93MagicTile hyperbolic {10,3} 6 color vertex turning 0:0:1=94.=
I have=20
already solved tha same puzlle with 12 colors
o with=20
18=92000 twists. You have to know that MagicTile puzzles can get seriously =
more=20
difficult if you diminish the number of colors because the place for manoeu=
vers=20
gets narrower. =93MagicTile hyperbolic {10,3} 6 color vertex turning 0:0:1=
=94 has=20
the following pieces: 1-c corner-faces, 3-c vertices, 1-c edge-faces and 1-=
c=20
faces. Correspondingly you can separate the puzzle in four stages. Normally=
the=20
first stages are easier to solve. I have not yet finishes the puzzle. But=20
already now as I have solved only 2 of 4 stages I have over 11=92000 twists=
and=20
plenty of experiences to tell from.
So far three members have expressed interest in participating in a new
speedsolving contest. (Yea!) We only need at least one more. Even if you
know you can't possibly win, participating will result in getting you an
official time. If this goes ahead, we'll schedule it so that you will
have ample time to practice beforehand. The last contest was a lot of
fun for everyone involved. Even if you don't enter, you can still watch
the action. That turned out to be very exciting and funny last time. And
of course there will be a prize, your choice of a 1-of-a-kind MC4D
T-shirt or mug!
So how about it? Are you willing to step out of your comfort zone give
it a shot? It's been nearly 5 years since the last one (has it really
been that long?), so it may be a long time before you get another
chance. You can reply publicly or privately. Please send your preferred
puzzle, settings, dates and times. We'll then discuss off-line to select
the details that everyone is happy with.
Happy puzzling!
-Melinda
--------------ABF305BCF0964F711D3FA0F5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
This is very sad news indeed and I've been slow to respond because of how deeply it has affected me. I am still very depressed about this.
Andrey was hugely inspirational to our group. I don't think that anyone will consider it an exaggeration to say that he was the biggest brain among this crazy group of brainiacs. Like Roice said, MHT633
As Nan pointed out, he wrote the 7-dimensional cube puzzle using an extremely clever UI that allows an additional three dimensions to be added to our familiar 4D projection. Nan's text formatting got lost in the email, so if you were confused, MC7D
He even created a 5D version of Pac Man
I have created an on-line memorial for Andrey here
Most importantly, I would really appreciate it if you would help me to contact his family so that I might be able to archive his source code. I am not on Facebook, so for anyone who is, please let them know what I want to do and why it is important. It is OK to publicly post my email address there or use the MagicCube4D@superliminal.com which I use for accepting solution files. It's OK if more than one person mentions this to them because it will show our level of interest in preserving his life's work.
-Melinda
On 1/13/2017 1:25 PM, Roice Nelson roice3@gmail.com [4D_Cubing] wrote:
> Thank you for letting the group know Nan. Andrey influenced me so much,
> and this news is very sad. I will miss him.
>
> I have many memories of Andrey, but thought I would share a few of my
> favorites...
>
> When he released MHT633, Andrey did not even tell us what it was - he let
> us guess! That was a fun way to announce it, and I still recall the
> excitement and joy investigating that amazing puzzle abstraction. The
> surprises were wonderful. It introduced me to exotic hyperbolic honeycombs
> for the first time, which have held my interest ever since, and he
> subsequently shared many further insights about them with me. To date, his
> MHT633 is still the coolest puzzle in my mind, abstracting so many
> different features of the original Rubik's cube. I like the way Andrey
> would blow my mind by conjuring up something way beyond my current thinking.
>
> I loved reading Andrey's emails for all their insights. Often I would need
> to read them a number of times. When he turned his attention to MagicTile,
> he noticed all sorts of things I hadn't considered. He pointed out how one
> of the {8,3} 6C puzzles was combinatorially the Rubik's cube in disguise.
> He had thoughts on what colorings would work and helped me map out
> identifications for the {8,3} 24C. He appreciated the beauty of certain
> puzzles and encouraged their creation - for example, he requested the
> hemi-Megaminx and knew it would be a special puzzle. He ended up digging
> into the configuration files and building some of his own. He had a great
> mind.
>
> For those who were friends with Andrey on facebook, folks are leaving
> messages on his page here
>
>
> Roice
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 10:24 AM,mananself@gmail.com [4D_Cubing] <
> 4D_Cubing@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>
>> I was so saddened to hear the tragic news that the member of our group,
>> the creator of many high dimensional puzzles, lost his battle to cancer. It
>> is a huge loss to his family and our little community.
>>
>> Andrey is the most creative, productive, talented, and passionate person I
>> know in this group. Many of us played the puzzles he created and are
>> inspired by them. Snippets from the MC4D website:
>>
>> "In 2010, Andrey Astrelin joined our community and immediately broke
>> several of our most cherished records. Not satisfied, he then wrote and
>> released his own seven dimensional version! MagicCube7D solves the problem
>> of visualizing such a high-dimensional object by starting with our
>> now-familiar 4D projection and then partially unrolling the last three
>> dimensions using a clever fractal-like design. Not just one puzzle this
>> amazing piece of code supports all 12 cubes from 3^4 through 5^7. Oh and then
>> he went and solved the 3^7."
>>
>> "Magic Puzzle Ultimate also from Andrey is his version of MagicCube4D. The
>> user interface is quite different and some experienced users prefer it. It
>> includes some unique and special puzzles such as the much desired and very
>> difficult 24-cell, the 48-cell, the 600-cell along with deep-cut truncated,
>> runcinated, rectified, and snub versions of many of these plus some 5D and
>> 6D puzzles."
>>
>> "Magic Hyperbolic Tile {6,3,3} from Andrey is the 3D version of Roice's
>> MagicTile because it lives in a hyperbolic 3-space. This puzzle turns out
>> to be devilishly hard but also gloriously beautiful to behold."
>>
>> I enjoyed discussing geometry and puzzles with Andrey in this group. His
>> great ideas and deep understandings enlightened us.
>>
>> Andrey loved puzzles so much. His family told me, that "he deals with
>> puzzles till the last days."
>>
>> Let's take a moment to remember Andrey. To me, Andrey moved to higher
>> dimensions. I'm sending my deepest condolences to his family.
>>
>> Sincerely,
>>
>> Nan Ma
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
--------------ABF305BCF0964F711D3FA0F5
Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
This is very sad news indeed and I've been slow to respond because
of how deeply it has affected me. I am still very depressed about
this.
Andrey was hugely inspirational to our group. I don't think that
anyone will consider it an exaggeration to say that he was the
biggest brain among this crazy group of brainiacs. Like Roice said,
MHT633 is
probably also the most mind-bending puzzle I've ever seen, and
Andrey is the only person to have solved the 8-color version. Philip
Strimpel solved the 52 color version, and all of the other versions
remain unsolved though I expect Roice to solve the 12 color version
before too long and I really look forward to his report.
As Nan pointed out, he wrote the 7-dimensional cube puzzle using an
extremely clever UI that allows an additional three dimensions to be
added to our familiar 4D projection. Nan's text formatting got lost
in the email, so if you were confused,
the 12 puzzles from 3x3x3x3 through 5x5x5x5x5x5x5. Amazing, right?
And his MPU
puzzle contains MC4D, with a UI that some solvers prefer, along with
the amazing 24-Cell, 600-Cell and other difficult puzzles.
Congratulations to Nan for solving its 48-cell FT Mirror Z. What a
wonderful way to honor Andrey!
He even created a
Pac Man. and
which is a multi-player 3D game, and even
4D car that can be driven with the keyboard! It's too bad he
never finished implementing his "steering sphere". What a mind!
I have created an on-line
memorial for Andrey here which includes an archive of all of
his wonderful programs except for the car. (Did he release it?) This
includes the latest version of
that he referenced in his final message to us so be sure you have
the latest. Please let me know if I don't have the latest versions
of everything else, and also alert me privately to any bad links or
typos that you find. I tried to improve his English in many cases
but have not done as careful a job as I would have liked, so I'm
sure there are many problems.
Most importantly, I would really appreciate it if you would help me
to contact his family so that I might be able to archive his source
code. I am not on Facebook, so for anyone who is, please let them
know what I want to do and why it is important. It is OK to publicly
post my email address there or use the MagicCube4D@superliminal.com
which I use for accepting solution files. It's OK if more than one
person mentions this to them because it will show our level of
interest in preserving his life's work.
-Melinda
[4D_Cubing] wrote:
type="cite">
Thank you for letting the group know Nan. Andrey influenced me so much,
and this news is very sad. I will miss him.
I have many memories of Andrey, but thought I would share a few of my
favorites...
When he released MHT633, Andrey did not even tell us what it was - he let
us guess! That was a fun way to announce it, and I still recall the
excitement and joy investigating that amazing puzzle abstraction. The
surprises were wonderful. It introduced me to exotic hyperbolic honeycombs
for the first time, which have held my interest ever since, and he
subsequently shared many further insights about them with me. To date, his
MHT633 is still the coolest puzzle in my mind, abstracting so many
different features of the original Rubik's cube. I like the way Andrey
would blow my mind by conjuring up something way beyond my current thinking.
I loved reading Andrey's emails for all their insights. Often I would need
to read them a number of times. When he turned his attention to MagicTile,
he noticed all sorts of things I hadn't considered. He pointed out how one
of the {8,3} 6C puzzles was combinatorially the Rubik's cube in disguise.
He had thoughts on what colorings would work and helped me map out
identifications for the {8,3} 24C. He appreciated the beauty of certain
puzzles and encouraged their creation - for example, he requested the
hemi-Megaminx and knew it would be a special puzzle. He ended up digging
into the configuration files and building some of his own. He had a great
mind.
For those who were friends with Andrey on facebook, folks are leaving
messages on his page here
<https://www.facebook.com/astr0073/posts/1650043985296523>.
Roice
On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 10:24 AM, mananself@gmail.com [4D_Cubing] <
4D_Cubing@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
I was so saddened to hear the tragic news that the member of our group,
the creator of many high dimensional puzzles, lost his battle to cancer. It
is a huge loss to his family and our little community.
Andrey is the most creative, productive, talented, and passionate person I
know in this group. Many of us played the puzzles he created and are
inspired by them. Snippets from the MC4D website:
"In 2010, Andrey Astrelin joined our community and immediately broke
several of our most cherished records. Not satisfied, he then wrote and
released his own seven dimensional version! MagicCube7D solves the problem
of visualizing such a high-dimensional object by starting with our
now-familiar 4D projection and then partially unrolling the last three
dimensions using a clever fractal-like design. Not just one puzzle this
amazing piece of code supports all 12 cubes from 3^4 through 5^7. Oh and then
he went and solved the 3^7."
"Magic Puzzle Ultimate also from Andrey is his version of MagicCube4D. The
user interface is quite different and some experienced users prefer it. It
includes some unique and special puzzles such as the much desired and very
difficult 24-cell, the 48-cell, the 600-cell along with deep-cut truncated,
runcinated, rectified, and snub versions of many of these plus some 5D and
6D puzzles."
"Magic Hyperbolic Tile {6,3,3} from Andrey is the 3D version of Roice's
MagicTile because it lives in a hyperbolic 3-space. This puzzle turns out
to be devilishly hard but also gloriously beautiful to behold."
I enjoyed discussing geometry and puzzles with Andrey in this group. His
great ideas and deep understandings enlightened us.
Andrey loved puzzles so much. His family told me, that "he deals with
puzzles till the last days."
Let's take a moment to remember Andrey. To me, Andrey moved to higher
dimensions. I'm sending my deepest condolences to his family.
Sincerely,
Nan Ma
--------------ABF305BCF0964F711D3FA0F5--