Rubik’s Cube People Are Freaky

I mean that in a good way, of course.

My friend Jason (who helps me fix up this site when needed) offers this impressive demonstration:

Wow.

It’s no 7 seconds, but I’ll be damned if I can get one side in under a minute even when cheating.

  • Rat Bastard

    Well, in all fairness, studying the thing first is technically a cheat. It then turns into muscle memory and synaptic speed to make sure you’ve done it right. By the same token, it’s flat awesome that the guy can do it that quickly! I’ll have to assume that he isn’t the one who scrambled it to begin with…

  • Jeff Satterley

    This isn’t quite as cool to watch, but one of my fellow PhD students at Northeastern University reduced the upper bound on God’s Number, which is the maximum number of moves needed to solve any Rubik’s cube configuration. Here’s the article

    (This is mostly for computer and math geeks, like me…)

  • http://toomanytribbles.blogspot.com/ toomanytribbles

    i think this is a video played backwards. you start with a fresh cube and mix it up.

  • http://skepticsplay.blogspot.com/ miller

    Jeff Satterley, the upper bound of God’s Number is currently 22. See here

    I don’t have the eye-hand coordination to turn the rubik’s cube that quickly, much less solve it that quickly. Instead, I content myself by putting a 4x4x4 into cool-looking positions.

  • Stephen

    Ah, the useless information and skills that one picks up from time to time. When I was in my twenties (and single) I once decided that I was going to crack the Cube. And indeed, while I could never compete with this, I eventually got to the stage where I could consistently solve it in around 2 minutes (with a record of about 70 seconds).

    Then I got bored with it. And when I tried it again a year or two later, I could no longer solve the damn thing at all! I never went back to it.

  • mikespeir

    People who are brighter than me are not to be trusted. They’re everywhere!

  • Tyson

    @ toomanytribbles

    Why do you think this guy is a cheat? People who immediately come to this conclusion need to start thinking with a more open mind. You’re falling into the same trap as a Christian. You want comfort in the world and you want to explain what he’s doing, but you don’t understand it right away so you say he’s a cheat?

    A quick search on the internet would show you that not only is this guy not a cheat, but he’s actually quite slow. A bit more research and knowledge would show you that he solves the orange side first, and that he uses a layer-by-layer method. If you look even more deeply, you realize he does not know all his algorithms for orienting the last layer, and his physical execution for the algorithm R U2 R2 U’ R2 U’ R2 U2 R is actually quite bad. (You would learn that from cubefreak.net because there’s a move called “Air Jeff” which is better.) Finally, if you really understood what was going on, you would have some idea of where he learned it. He finishes the cube with a 9-move algorithm, but there is an 11-move 2-generator algorithm that solves the same case that is much easier to execute.

    It is all right to say, “I don’t know the answer. I don’t know how this is done.” But to claim that this person is a cheat is to give up logical reasoning, and not actually gather evidence and do research like a good atheist should.

    Listen, don’t come to conclusion like you just did. Saying he’s a cheat is like saying “goddidit”. Inquiry and conclusion from evidence is the only way to derive answers from this world.

    -Tyson
    World Cube Association Co-Founder
    Board Member
    Representative of North and South America

  • Dan

    Now try him on one of these

  • Tyson

    @ Dan

    That’s actually not much harder. It first came out as the Cube-21 and in the United States, it’s called a Square-1. The best people in the world solve that puzzle in about 15 seconds and the majority of them happen to be Polish.

    The picture which you show is a marketing scheme. They’ve twisted the puzzle in completely so it looks more impressive/convoluted than it really is. The picture actually shows the puzzle being turned only half-way.

    None of these ‘twisty-puzzles’ are really any different. If you can solve the 3x3x3 Rubik’s Cube, you can pretty much figure out all the rest. It really depends how much time you’re willing to waste. You’d have better luck picking up girls at chess tournaments than you would at Rubik’s Cube competitions.

  • http://toomanytribbles.blogspot.com/ toomanytribbles

    @tyson

    i’ve seen videos that were played backwards and this looked very similar. i said i think, not i know and i’m glad to be wrong. it was a hypothesis and i didn’t go into researching it as it’s not that all that interesting to me.

    if it were more interesting (to me) i’d have checked on it, as a good anybody, and not just atheist, should.

    in any case, good for him.

  • Shane

    @Tyson

    Yep, obviously cheating and just playing the movie backwards. I’m simply not comfortable in a world where I don’t understand everything right away. :-)
    Hit a nerve there, or what?

    World Cube Association? Well, to each his own I suppose…

  • T’s Grammy

    Don’t feel bad. I haven’t been able to solve the damn thing in all these decades since it first hit as a fad. I admit I gave up.

    The electronic one is cool though and a bit more fun since it’s not over my head. My grandson is scary good with it.

  • http://leyanlo.tumblr.com Leyan

    Watch Tyson solve a Rubik’s cube BLINDFOLDED!
    Blind Rubik’s Cube

  • http://jbrtva.blogspot.com Jess

    I thought for a minute that you might have been talking about your other friend Jason, who happens to be very good at the rubix cube, too.

    Personally, I can’t do it to save my life. Isn’t it supposed to be mathematical? So much for that….


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X