On 1 Jun 1996, Wei-Hwa Huang wrote:
As another aside, I don't understand the rationale behind the canonical
4x4x4 design. It would seem to me that it's better to have two rings of
grooves in each dimension, so that the face pieces could have "fatter"
legs and not break off as easily.
If the center pieces had one leg each (instead of a 1/4-leg) you would
have _one_ groove around each equator (instead of _half_ a groove).
Remember, it's important that the inner sphere stay in sync with at
least one of the sets of face centers so that after you've finished
the turn you will be able to turn in an orthogonal direction. I don't
know how that would work with the turns of the face. You might need
a switch that looks kind of like the following where two equators meet:
I I * * * I * * ============O===============O======== * I * I * I * * I * * I * I * I * O O I * * I * * * I
where the legs live at the "O" positions when a turn is not in
progress. But this looks dangerous to me; I think there is a lot of
potential for derailment.