Waw I'm excited ! Was stuck on this cube and now it's resolevd ! =} I only had the edge parity that time, so i'll have to stay on your video for next solve I presume ^^ But i'm allready really hyped, your solution for the edge parity, "simply" exchanging the edges parts, is really on point ! I used another algorythm by the way, it forced me to scramble a bit the cube but it was a quick fix, and it worked ! Next time i'll try yours =) I can't believe I didn't tried this by myself ! On all other tutorials, it takes forever and it's complicated, I'm not complaining nor bashing, I like their channel and I used a lot of their amazing content, but sometimes they're not enought pedagog... Here in five minutes of watching time it was done ^^ Well, I'll not tell all my life xD Just tell you a big thanks !
These solutions won’t work on other shapeshifter puzzles like the Axis cube or the ghost cube, because the solutions depend on being able to rotate the center using equivalent pieces. All pieces on those other puzzles are unique, so swapping them around won’t work. You would need to rotate two centers. Why not use the same algorithm that you use for two edge parity in a 4x4 Rubik's? I’m not sure whether I am goofing it up or whether it’s not guaranteed to work every time. It works every time on a Rubik, but maybe that's because the center pieces are all equivalent and interchangeable.
Generally speaking you can, keeping in mind some of the 4x4 cube algorithms may rotate one or more centres. I personally like to understand and reason about what I am doing. This makes it a lot more enjoyable for me :)
@@tdbtdbthedeadbunny Taking the 4x4x4 rubik's cube and the megamorphix as examples: They are equivallent in the sense that every piece in one can be mapped into a piece on the other. So "generally speaking" every algorithm you perform on one is 100% equivallent to being performed on the other. However, because they have different symmetries you might not get the desired result. So, if you perform the cube's edge parity algorithm on the megamorphix, the edge parity will definitely be solved, but this might have the side effect of rotating one or more centres. This side effect is not noticed on the cube (although it occurs), because its centres have rotational symmetry. Utilising the symmetries of a problem greatly simplfies the solution.
Waw I'm excited ! Was stuck on this cube and now it's resolevd ! =}
I only had the edge parity that time, so i'll have to stay on your video for next solve I presume ^^ But i'm allready really hyped, your solution for the edge parity, "simply" exchanging the edges parts, is really on point !
I used another algorythm by the way, it forced me to scramble a bit the cube but it was a quick fix, and it worked ! Next time i'll try yours =) I can't believe I didn't tried this by myself !
On all other tutorials, it takes forever and it's complicated, I'm not complaining nor bashing, I like their channel and I used a lot of their amazing content, but sometimes they're not enought pedagog... Here in five minutes of watching time it was done ^^
Well, I'll not tell all my life xD Just tell you a big thanks !
4:02 In this part, I don’t get it since you are like regripping and I struggled on it a few times, can you tell me the algorithm for it?
F' U F U' R U' R' . Hope this helps
thanks
These solutions won’t work on other shapeshifter puzzles like the Axis cube or the ghost cube, because the solutions depend on being able to rotate the center using equivalent pieces. All pieces on those other puzzles are unique, so swapping them around won’t work. You would need to rotate two centers.
Why not use the same algorithm that you use for two edge parity in a 4x4 Rubik's? I’m not sure whether I am goofing it up or whether it’s not guaranteed to work every time. It works every time on a Rubik, but maybe that's because the center pieces are all equivalent and interchangeable.
Generally speaking you can, keeping in mind some of the 4x4 cube algorithms may rotate one or more centres. I personally like to understand and reason about what I am doing. This makes it a lot more enjoyable for me :)
@@supersymmetry2517 yes, the point is to understand. Why do you qualify your statement with “generally speaking?”
@@tdbtdbthedeadbunny Taking the 4x4x4 rubik's cube and the megamorphix as examples: They are equivallent in the sense that every piece in one can be mapped into a piece on the other. So "generally speaking" every algorithm you perform on one is 100% equivallent to being performed on the other. However, because they have different symmetries you might not get the desired result. So, if you perform the cube's edge parity algorithm on the megamorphix, the edge parity will definitely be solved, but this might have the side effect of rotating one or more centres. This side effect is not noticed on the cube (although it occurs), because its centres have rotational symmetry. Utilising the symmetries of a problem greatly simplfies the solution.
Very good
Thanks a million
thank you very much. Great video!
Nice.