[next] [prev] [up] Date: Sun, 18 Feb 96 15:41:29 -0500
[next] [prev] [up] From: [unknown name] <AirWong@aol.com >
~~~ ~~~ [up] Subject: Re Resolution of the cube

A few messages ago yo was this

-> Now you've pushed my button.
-> When the cube first came out, a bunch of us at MIT were wild to solve
-> it. There were _no_ published solutions. At least three or four of
-> us solved the cube by ourselves, independently. We twisted and
-> turned, drew arcane diagrams to show what went where, and although it
-> sometimes took a couple of weeks, we each managed it.
-> Then the books started to come out, and as far as I can tell, no one
-> ever solved it independently again.

-Bzzzzzz ...... wrong.

-I do understand that Allan Wechsler was one of the original -solvers,
-before the glut of books on the subject, however I solved the -cube and
-the megaminx independently. Even though there were many cube -books,
-there was only one megaminx (rubik-type dodecahedron) book, and -it was
-rather hard to follow.

I, too, solved the cube independent of a book. However, after I was done, I
found a few books and other algorithms (as well as some friends) and compared
the solutions. There are many ways to solve it, and it was fun trying to
solve the cube combining the different ideas. When I hunt down Thistlewaite's
algorithm it should get even more interesting.

Aaron WOng

[next] [prev] [up] [top] [help]