[next] [prev] [up] Date: Fri, 18 Feb 94 14:43:52 +0100
[next] [prev] [up] From: Jan de Ruiter <jandr@xirion.nl >
[next] [prev] [up] Subject: [no subject]

To: cube-lovers@life.ai.mit.edu
Subject: Re: 10x10 Tangle

Sorry about not reporting this earlier, but my search for solutions for
Rubiks Tangle 10x10 confirms the finding of Don Woods: no solutions!

Dik Winter writes:
>As I wrote before, I have embedded in my memory that there is an easy
>argument that the 10x10 is *not* solvable. I do not know whether I
>found it myself (and ever did mail it to other people) or whether I
>found it somewhere on the net; it is a long time ago. When I find the
>time I will do a check. (I know very sure that I have had a program
>running at that time but that I abandoned the search because it would
>be fruitless.)

I am beginning to get real curious about that 'easy argument'.
Does this argument depend on the particular choice for the four
duplicated pieces or not?
If it does, there could exist a choice that does allow a solution, and
we could re-define the puzzle as follows:
find which four pieces to duplicate in order to find solutions for
the 10x10.
If the number of solutions varies depending on the choice, you could
even add a restriction:
find which four pieces to duplicate in order to find a set which has
the minimum number of solutions for the 10x10.

But if the easy argument does NOT depend on the choice, i.e.: any
choice would lead to no solutions, then the above puzzles would be
senseless as well.

So if anyone at all knows this argument, please tell us and solve the


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