# A new take on cubing -No colors, just numbers!!



## jwilde0926 (Aug 28, 2013)

Hey SpeedSolving!

My name’s James and I’m writing to you on behalf of the Innovation Factory in Chicago. We’re launching a product called the Magic Cube that I think you guys are really going to like. It takes the traditional 3x3x3 Rubik’s Cube and adds a layer of complexity. We've determined six significant number sequences and constants and arranged each of them on a side of the cube. It's your task to not only discover the arrangement of numbers on each face, but to rearrange them so that they are in the correct order and orientation.

We believe this is an extremely difficult, bordering on insane task, but figured that if anyone could solve it, this would be a great place to start. To find someone able to accomplish this, we’ve launched a competition to see who can solve it first. We’ve sent out invitations to high-ranking geniuses that we think have a shot at it, but have also opened it up to anyone to nominate themself or someone else. If selected, you will receive a free plastic version of the Magic Cube and the first person to correctly solve it will receive one of the first solid aluminum, engraved Magic Cubes.

If you would like to nominate yourself or someone else, please send an email to [email protected] with the following info:

Name of Nominee:
Email of Nominee:
(Include your name and email if you are nominating someone else)
Shipping Address of Nominee:
Reason why you think Nominee is worthy of this challenge:

For more info, check out our product page at http://if-chicago.com/portfolio/the-magic-cube and watch the video on that page and at http://youtu.be/hmbthzn7qqc 

Happy Cubing!


----------



## Mike Hughey (Aug 28, 2013)

If the numbers really have to be oriented correctly so that they face up, the number of possible solutions once you solve the cube for orientation is really quite small. I'm guessing one of our math whiz people here can surely solve it easily within hours of receiving it. qqwref, cmhardw, Tim Reynolds, cuBerBruce - I'd think any of them would have an easy time with this.

Would anyone care to calculate the number of possible solutions given correct orientation, just so we know just how hard this really might be?


----------



## Wassili (Aug 28, 2013)

Wait, I'm confused, how does the cube look like in a solved state?


----------



## Mike Hughey (Aug 28, 2013)

If you watch the video, it implies that the solved state will have a set of numbers all facing the same direction on each face. The numbers on any given face will form some sequence that makes some kind of sense. Since the OP talks about number sequences and constants, I'm guessing that each face is probably either a mathematical sequence of some sort or else digits from some well-known constant, like maybe pi or e.


----------



## Wassili (Aug 28, 2013)

Ah yes, sorry I missed the video!


----------



## Mike Hughey (Aug 28, 2013)

I guess this is harder than I thought. For each layer, bottom, middle, top, all pieces of a given type (corners or edges) could be exchanged, although that would be constrained by parity. So is that (24 ^ 5) / 2 possibilities? So about 4 million. I guess how hard this is would depend on how obvious the sequences and/or constants are to identify, and maybe on a bit of luck stumbling on the answer.

Perhaps the way to solve this would be to first solve the cube for orientation, then write a program to generate the 4 million combinations, then start looking through the generated list trying to find a combination that makes sense? If you had a program that looked for sequences/constants, that might help.


----------



## Stefan (Aug 29, 2013)

Is someone willing to provide the layout? Brest?



Spoiler



Mike: I'm pretty sure I've seen 13, 21, 34 possible as a bottom row. That should pretty much tell us one layer, reduce the number of possibilities, and give us hints for the adjacent layers.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote from the video: _"That's around 3000 times as many combinations as for a regular Rubik's cube. So it's a great deal more difficult."_

Hahahahahahahaha. Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha. No.

Also, _"magic cube"_? You pick the generic name used by knock-offs as the name for your product?


----------



## Nathan Dwyer (Aug 29, 2013)

"Magic Cube" = terribly generic name


----------



## Mike Hughey (Aug 29, 2013)

Mike Hughey said:


> I guess this is harder than I thought. For each layer, bottom, middle, top, all pieces of a given type (corners or edges) could be exchanged, although that would be constrained by parity. So is that (24 ^ 5) / 2 possibilities? So about 4 million. I guess how hard this is would depend on how obvious the sequences and/or constants are to identify, and maybe on a bit of luck stumbling on the answer.
> 
> Perhaps the way to solve this would be to first solve the cube for orientation, then write a program to generate the 4 million combinations, then start looking through the generated list trying to find a combination that makes sense? If you had a program that looked for sequences/constants, that might help.



Wait, I'm stupid. If the numbers are all facing up on the 4 sides when it's solved (which looks likely based on watching the video, although I'm not positive of it), then there really is only one possible configuration for the top and bottom faces. (Unless you count some of the numbers which could face either way, like 6 vs. 9. And that won't make it that much harder unless there are a lot of them, and it doesn't look like there are.) So that brings our 4 million down to ... 24. Wow. This is going to be solved almost instantly. (If my assumptions are correct.)


----------



## j0k3rj0k3r (Aug 29, 2013)

I think the magic cube is a play off of magic squares which are here


----------



## Stefan (Aug 29, 2013)

I might know three sides now.



Spoiler: last three numbers on the three sides



_, _, _, _, _, _, 13, 21, 34


Spoiler: name of sequence



Fibonacci numbers


_, _, _, _, _, _, 28, 36, 45


Spoiler: name of sequence



Triangular numbers


_, _, _, _, _, _, 17, 19, 23


Spoiler: name of sequence



Prime numbers


And j0k3rj0k3r might be "right", one side could be the standard magic square ("right" in quotes cause that's not quite what he said). I think so because there are at least two "5" centers, because there's at least one lower right "2" so not all will be increasing sequences, and because there really should be a magic square side.


----------



## 420 (Aug 29, 2013)

I, for one, think that this is a pretty damn cool looking puzzle. Some of the math whizzes on here could just plug a bunch of numbers into some magical equation of theirs and solve this almost immediately, but to actually experiment and identify the significance of the numbers seems like quite a challenge for somebody like myself with not as much mathematical knowledge of the cube.

Question, though. I'm assuming that, since this is a sort of competition, the cubes will all be mailed out pre-"scrambled"?

It'd be extremely fun to have a puzzle like this, though, knowing that you'd be pitted against some of the most intellectual people on the planet to solve it.

Good luck to anybody who undertakes the challenge!


----------



## Stefan (Aug 29, 2013)

420 said:


> the cubes will all be mailed out pre-"scrambled"?



Obviously. Also, they kinda said something like that in the video.



420 said:


> It'd be extremely fun to have a puzzle like this, though, knowing that you'd be pitted against some of *the most intellectual people on the planet* to solve it.



They're trying to give them to company CEOs/bosses, not Stephen Hawking.


----------



## 420 (Aug 29, 2013)

Stefan said:


> Obviously. Also, they kinda said something like that in the video.
> 
> They're trying to give them to company CEOs/bosses, not Stephen Hawking.



My apologies, wasn't able to watch the video with sound yet; was only able to glance through it briefly. 

*Correction: the people who work with the most intellectual people on the planet but who aren't quite them.*


----------



## Stefan (Aug 29, 2013)

420 said:


> *Correction: the people who work with the most intellectual people on the planet but who aren't quite them.*





And I admit they at least went on saying "heads of math departments", cryptologists and former hackers (why *former*?).


----------



## Owen (Aug 29, 2013)

Stefan said:


> former hackers (why *former*?).



I'd guess it's because "hacking" is seen by the media as illicit or criminal.


----------



## 420 (Aug 29, 2013)

Owen said:


> I'd guess it's because "hacking" is seen by the media as illicit or criminal.



Well, there's something called "ethical hacking". Although the fact that they needed to include the word "former" probably hints at the fact that they weren't ethical hackers. The fact that we know exactly who these people are probably hints that they weren't very good "unethical hackers" either.


----------



## flee135 (Aug 29, 2013)

This reminds me of a sudokube. I bought one before I knew how to solve Rubik's Cubes, but shortly after I learned how to solve one, it wasn't too hard to use that knowledge to solve one. Based on how the corners looked, I could tell that four of the centers were all oriented in the same direction, so just based on the orientation of some of the numbers, it's easy to figure out where the pieces need to go. The thing with the sudokube is that it wasn't hard to verify that a piece is in the wrong place (no two digits on a side can be the same), which might be a little tougher for this puzzle, but on the other hand, as you get more pieces in place, it shouldn't be hard to recognize some of the sequences and constants on this puzzle either.


----------



## windhero (Aug 29, 2013)

Isnt this just a sudokube with a bit more trial and error involved? I dont think this is anything new in the range of difficulty. Just orient everything correctly and figure out the order, no?


----------



## windhero (Aug 29, 2013)

Here are some of the pieces I saw, I'm not 100% sure. But yeah, if you orient all the corners and all the centers it doesnt leave many choices now does it?

Edges:
8-1
21-X
3-13
8-X
6-3
4-3
1-16
7-X


Corners:
6-5-2
5-x-x
17-3-x
1-10-x
34-x-x
2-2-x
1-1-38
13-2-8

These 2 are a combination with the above, didnt see all the number at once so it has to be deduced without seeing it)
28-x-x
4-45-x
Centers
5
11
15
2


----------



## Hypocrism (Aug 29, 2013)

Doesn't sound that difficult. Start with the corners and try to work out the sequences, when it becomes trivial.

Also if it DOES turn out tricky to determine the sequences, people might just take it apart to work out what orientation of pieces is oriented, so reducing it even further.


----------



## AvGalen (Aug 29, 2013)

Sounds like a cool husband and wife solve. Her math skills are higher than mine, my cubing skills are higher than hers. But we both have a decent level in both.
I think it will keep us busy for an evening, but not more.

Also, can I just peel of the stickers?


----------



## JackJ (Aug 29, 2013)

This reminds me a lot of a sudoku cube. Really, any one that has any basic knowledge of the cube & patience should be able to solve this.


----------



## Mike Hughey (Aug 29, 2013)

With Stefan's sleuthing, I think it's pretty safe to say we already know enough to solve it with no additional knowledge. It would likely take me less than 10 minutes to solve it now. I suspect some people on here could solve it in less than a minute armed with the knowledge we have; I'm just not particularly good at solving picture cubes, so I suspect I'd be really slow.


----------



## qqwref (Aug 29, 2013)

This sounds like an interesting puzzle, although I agree with the general sentiment that it may not be all that difficult for serious cubers. An aluminum cube sounds nice though


----------



## Ollie (Aug 29, 2013)

Sorry if this point has been raised already, but surely it wouldn't be much use giving the puzzle to CEOs and top bosses etc if they have had no experience of puzzle solving? You could work out the 'solution' but not actually have the know-how to put pieces in the correct place?

Or is that the point?


----------



## Stefan (Aug 29, 2013)

Ollie said:


> surely it wouldn't be much use giving the puzzle to CEOs and top bosses etc if they have had no experience of puzzle solving?



I'm pretty sure they're not trying to give it to CEOs and the like because they necessarily want them to solve it (I imagine most CEOs won't even bother or won't even receive it cause their assistants will filter it out already, that's why I keep saying they're _*trying to*_ give it to them). The point probably is mainly to create publicity like this msn article. If some of the famous people actually try it or even solve it and create more publicity for the company, then that's of course even better for them, but I doubt they're counting on that.


----------



## ~Adam~ (Aug 29, 2013)

Are you planning on putting aluminium cubes up for sale?

As already stated it shouldn't be too tricky to solve. Once a couple of the sequences have been worked out there will be very little trial and error required for most of this community to solve these puzzles but I really want an aluminium cube.


----------



## cmhardw (Aug 29, 2013)

If this puzzle orients 4 adjacent sides (let's say it's all four sides the E layer passes through) the same way, then I agree with others here that solving all the corners will be a straightforward solution using 2x2x2 speedsolve methods. From there you can use orientation clues to narrow down certain spots that edges may occupy and use commutators to move them. Figuring out where the centers can go can be done using clues from the corners and any additional knowledge gained from the edges.

I think this puzzle will be hard, and a lot of fun, but I agree that they're making it out to be "nearly impossible" as a marketing strategy more than an actual claim about the puzzle's actual difficulty. Maybe they are being halfway serious about the claims of how hard the puzzle will be, but that would mean that they did most likely did not consult a cuber about the issue of orientation clues being so very useful in the solving of the corners on a number cube like this.

--edit--
If they made a puzzle similar to this that used numbers contained inside a plastic dome, sort of like the "googly" eyes you see on craft projects, now THAT would be a hard puzzle.

Wow, if they make "googly" numbers like this I might try to make a puzzle like that. This would completely eliminate all information gained from orientation clues, but it would also mean that it wouldn't really be a supercube either, but it would still be fun to try!


----------



## ~Adam~ (Aug 29, 2013)

All the numbers on the corners and edges having the same orientation as each other would make the puzzle much harder to solve (the 1st time) IMO but it would ruin the aesthetic of the cube.


----------



## Michael Womack (Aug 30, 2013)

this cube reminds me of the Sudoku cube as shown here http://goo.gl/vA02w7


----------



## ~Adam~ (Aug 30, 2013)

The website says that the winner will be the person who sends pictures of all 6 solved sides 1st. If there is enough information between the video and pictures to form an image of the solved cube can we claim the prize?


----------



## peterbone (Aug 30, 2013)

cube-o-holic said:


> The website says that the winner will be the person who sends pictures of all 6 solved sides 1st. If there is enough information between the video and pictures to form an image of the solved cube can we claim the prize?


That would be great if a cuber wins before they even send the cubes. A good start would be to create 6 images of the sides of a scrambled cube (from the images or the video) and then texture map them onto a simulation cube to play around with solving it. My Rubix simulator allows loading of images onto the sides of the cube (see my sig).


----------



## AvGalen (Aug 30, 2013)

peterbone said:


> That would be great if a cuber wins before they even send the cubes. A good start would be to create 6 images of the sides of a scrambled cube (from the images or the video) and then texture map them onto a simulation cube to play around with solving it. My Rubix simulator allows loading of images onto the sides of the cube (see my sig).


I applied, so I don't want to ruin the surprise/challenge by already taking a look at the video



Stefan said:


> I'm pretty sure they're not trying to give it to CEOs and the like because they necessarily want them to solve it (I imagine most CEOs won't even bother or won't even receive it cause their assistants will filter it out already, that's why I keep saying they're _*trying to*_ give it to them). The point probably is mainly to create publicity like this msn article. If some of the famous people actually try it or even solve it and create more publicity for the company, then that's of course even better for them, but I doubt they're counting on that.


That message made me sad. It seems that although we are encouraged to apply for our selves or for others this is not aimed at puzzlers at all.
I am pretty sure that someone those companies will eventually pass it along to "the office cuber" that will get it figured out


----------



## ~Adam~ (Aug 30, 2013)

AvGalen said:


> I applied, so I don't want to ruin the surprise/challenge by already taking a look at the video



They are only sending 20 additional cubes out to applicants. You probably won't get one anyway.


----------



## Stefan (Aug 30, 2013)

AvGalen said:


> That message made me sad. It seems that although we are encouraged to apply for our selves or for others this is not aimed at puzzlers at all.



Well, of all the possible ways one could generate publicity, this is a rather "puzzly" one. I like it.

Btw, this doesn't seem right:





I think the third number on the corner is a 5 oriented the same way in both cases. I'd be surprised if there were two 45-4-5 corners that differ like this, so I guess their video/pics can't be trusted.


----------



## peterbone (Aug 30, 2013)

Stefan, well spotted. I would put my trust in the left hand image rather than the right one though. Their 3D model clearly shows the same as your left image in their picture and video. It's much more likely that the sticker was put the wrong way round on the plastic one.
It's possible that all cubes are assembled in the scrambled state so that the solution isn't leaked. This would increase the chances of a mis-orientation of one of the stickers.


----------



## ~Adam~ (Aug 30, 2013)

So they are going to be sending out potentially unsolvable puzzles? Awesome. I guess people will need their hints after a month after all.


----------



## 420 (Aug 30, 2013)

cube-o-holic said:


> So they are going to be sending out potentially unsolvable puzzles? Awesome. I guess people will need their hints after a month after all.



I have a feeling hints aren't going to help with unsolvable puzzles. 

Wouldn't it be much safer to print all the puzzles in the solved state and just apply the same scramble to each one?

edit:* ^ I have no idea who I was asking that question. The OP seems to have abandoned the forums immediately after posting his challenge.


----------



## chardison1980 (Aug 30, 2013)

Stefan said:


> Well, of all the possible ways one could generate publicity, this is a rather "puzzly" one. I like it.
> 
> Btw, this doesn't seem right:
> 
> ...



Yes Stefan after checking out the videos and pics again the top of the 4 faces the 45 so looks like the 4 sticker w put on wrong com paired to the etched cubes I hope they fix that before sending out this cube to people


----------



## windhero (Aug 30, 2013)

Meh, obvious marketing trick as said by Stefan. This is exactly why I want a cuber to solve it before it's even launched completely. Shame we can do nothing based on the video (or we probably could but it would require relying too much on assumptions).


----------



## Benje00 (Aug 30, 2013)

My idea is that the numbers have to equal a certain number on each side by adding them vertically, horizontally, and diagonally, hence the name "Magic Cube".


----------



## ~Adam~ (Aug 30, 2013)

I doubt it Benje. From the still the vast majority of the numbers are single digit, then a few are larger (23, 34, 35 and 45) which are all bottom right and one is bottom middle.


----------



## Rnewms (Aug 30, 2013)

Progress with Rubix. Exact rotations and number placements may be prone to error as seen by picture comparisons within this thread.


----------



## Frinkiac (Aug 30, 2013)

First time posting, so be kind.

Without posting spoilers, just wanted to say I already solved their cube (stickered/numbered my Zhanchi with PostIt's). From what I found, the video they posted had enough imagery of the cube to get all but one of the tiles, and as for piecing the sequences together, there was enough information to correctly guess the final missing tile I couldn't quite see.

The 3D model they had on the video matches the aluminum-milled cubes (the stickered cube differs a little bit from that because one or more of the sequence sticker sets was either rotated 90 degrees before being placed on the cube, or was just placed on a different side of the cube). Some people in the forums are on the right track to figuring out all the sequences. Overall, it was a good challenge.


----------



## ~Adam~ (Aug 30, 2013)

So fill in an application with reason you think you should qualify being you have already solved it and hope you get hundreds of dollars worth of aluminium cube =D


----------



## Frinkiac (Aug 30, 2013)

cube-o-holic said:


> So fill in an application with reason you think you should qualify being you have already solved it and hope you get hundreds of dollars worth of aluminium cube =D



I already did, and sent them the picture of the solution. Haven't heard back from them yet, though.

I want my aluminum cube, dagnabbit!


----------



## Rnewms (Aug 30, 2013)

It is worth noting that the stickered, aluminum, and CAD versions each have different placements/orientations of numbers. The CAD part of the clip shows the two 5 centers opposite while another cube shows that they are adjacent.


----------



## Frinkiac (Aug 30, 2013)

There are actually 3 centers with '5's. They are both adjacent and opposite (from what I found on the aluminum and CAD models, at least). The stickered cube seemed to vary from the aluminum/CAD number rotation, so I focused mainly on the latter two for number placement. In the end, the cube solved as expected (including super-cubing the centers) without having to move PostIt's or twist corners.


----------



## ~Adam~ (Aug 30, 2013)

Frinkiac said:


> I already did, and sent them the picture of the solution. Haven't heard back from them yet, though.
> 
> I want my aluminum cube, dagnabbit!



I'll buy it off you if you would prefer the $$$.


----------



## Frinkiac (Aug 30, 2013)

I don't know, it's not every day one gets to acquire a solid aluminum Rubik's (...sorry, "Magic") cube. I think I would hold onto it.


----------



## ~Adam~ (Aug 30, 2013)

Well if you do win (which I doubt they will allow because it would make their competition look like a joke) and need some cash drop me a PM.


----------



## Frinkiac (Aug 30, 2013)

This is true (for stickering AND solving, it only took about an hour of my time, after they said it would most likely take weeks to solve). Maybe this is why I haven't heard back yet? Oh well, if anything, I found it to be a neat challenge.

I'll at least keep the offer in my mind in case they do honor my submission.


----------



## BaMiao (Aug 30, 2013)

I would consider posting the solution here, or someplace public and timestamped (in a spoiler in case others are still puzzling). It would really throw a monkey wrench into the whole contest plan. Having someone solve their puzzle based solely on their promotional materials would be a pretty big embarrassment. Having it done publicly in a way that they couldn't deny after the fact would be much more so.


----------



## MaikeruKonare (Aug 30, 2013)

You're only giving out an additional 20 cubes? Seems like that isn't enough to find the right person. They probably won't accept me just because I'm in high school:3


----------



## Frinkiac (Aug 30, 2013)

BaMiao said:


> I would consider posting the solution here, or someplace public and timestamped (in a spoiler in case others are still puzzling). It would really throw a monkey wrench into the whole contest plan. Having someone solve their puzzle based solely on their promotional materials would be a pretty big embarrassment. Having it done publicly in a way that they couldn't deny after the fact would be much more so.



While I certainly could do that, after looking through their site, I have to admit they look like a pretty cool crew in the stuff they do, and I wouldn't want to damage/shame the credibility of their site over a little puzzle.

I suppose what I could do is to upload a password-protected .zip of my solution image somewhere and release the password after an appropriate amount of time. That way, I think it would more save their face and would prevent spoilers from leaking before the competition even begins.


----------



## BaMiao (Aug 30, 2013)

Frinkiac said:


> While I certainly could do that, after looking through their site, I have to admit they look like a pretty cool crew in the stuff they do, and I wouldn't want to damage/shame the credibility of their site over a little puzzle.
> 
> I suppose what I could do is to upload a password-protected .zip of my solution image somewhere and release the password after an appropriate amount of time. That way, I think it would more save their face and would prevent spoilers from leaking before the competition even begins.



Yeah, totally understand. I'm just thinking that if you really did, indeed, solve the puzzle, you should get recognition for it. Your plan seems pretty good.


----------



## Frinkiac (Aug 30, 2013)

Alrighty then. Well, here's at least the password-protected .zip of my solution image via Dropbox for the sake of having time-stamped proof (password will be given at another time):

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/54424533/Magic Number Cube Solution-2.zip


----------



## Stefan (Aug 31, 2013)

Frinkiac said:


> Alrighty then. Well, here's at least the password-protected .zip of my solution image via Dropbox for the sake of having time-stamped proof (password will be given at another time):
> 
> https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/54424533/Magic Number Cube Solution-2.zip



Can't you switch that file later for one with a fake back-dated date?


----------



## ~Adam~ (Aug 31, 2013)

Just your solution up the day they release the cubes.


----------



## Frinkiac (Aug 31, 2013)

Stefan said:


> Can't you switch that file later for one with a fake back-dated date?



Not if people download the .zip now and wait to open it. There wouldn't be any chance of me changing files downloaded to other people's computers. 

Might there be a better suggestion for upload I could use (currently, Dropbox was the only program I could think of to make public uploads, unless the forums would allow me to directly attach a .zip to a message... which looking in my options, they say I have that ability, but I haven't found a successful way of doing so yet)?


----------



## Stefan (Aug 31, 2013)

Frinkiac said:


> Not if people download the .zip now and wait to open it. There wouldn't be any chance of me changing files downloaded to other people's computers.



Yes, I had already downloaded it so it will prove it to *me*, but I thought you wanted to prove it to the company or possibly outsiders.

Put it on facebook as a private picture, maybe? Then set it to public when the time comes.


----------



## Frinkiac (Aug 31, 2013)

Here we go, this should keep everything honest to ensure my uploaded file doesn't change. Below is the SHA-256 hash of my aforementioned .zip (acquired from onlinemd5.com with SHA-256 selected) which you may compare at anytime. If the file changes in any way, it will result in a different hash from the one below:

95EC86ADA17BD12CC3968015D68B5D8C5308BC0F0B2B5DACEB89BC0F530592C8


----------



## Dene (Sep 1, 2013)

The biggest mistake these guys made was posting that thing on here lol. Didn't they realise this is like the 4chan of cubing?


----------



## 420 (Sep 1, 2013)

I lol at the fact that one, just _one_ of the 20 people chosen to get a free cube will end up being someone from on here.

So much for needing those hints after 60 days; the puzzle's gonna be solved in 60 seconds.


----------



## Ollie (Sep 1, 2013)

Since some people have solved the puzzle (theoretically) we should work with the inventor to make more challenging puzzles, rather than gang up on them and try to humiliate them with what we've already worked out? Surely more useful connections can be made by communicating with them in this way?


----------



## Dene (Sep 1, 2013)

Ollie said:


> Since some people have solved the puzzle (theoretically) we should work with the inventor to make more challenging puzzles, rather than gang up on them and try to humiliate them with what we've already worked out? Surely more useful connections can be made by communicating with them in this way?



Or perhaps they should do their research more thoroughly before releasing a product and making misleading/false claims.


----------



## Owen (Sep 1, 2013)

Does anyone know where they got the "140 sextillion combinations" figure?


----------



## rj (Sep 1, 2013)

Owen said:


> Does anyone know where they got the "140 sextillion combinations" figure?



I think it has to do with center rotations.


----------



## cubernya (Sep 1, 2013)

Owen said:


> Does anyone know where they got the "140 sextillion combinations" figure?



They included center rotations (the figure is actually wrong, it should be double that, since a 180° turn of one center is possible)


----------



## Stefan (Sep 1, 2013)

Frinkiac said:


> Here we go, this should keep everything honest to ensure my uploaded file doesn't change. Below is the SHA-256 hash of my aforementioned .zip (acquired from onlinemd5.com with SHA-256 selected) which you may compare at anytime. If the file changes in any way, it will result in a different hash from the one below:
> 
> 95EC86ADA17BD12CC3968015D68B5D8C5308BC0F0B2B5DACEB89BC0F530592C8



Well, maybe the admins here will help you invisibly change that hash later on? Not that absurd, given how some cubers here already expressed how they dislike the contest and would like to foil it. Again I suggest facebook, as surely its harder to get such help there.

And of course, none of this proves that you gave your solution to the company.



theZcuber said:


> the figure is actually wrong, it should be double that



No. Try again.


----------



## Frinkiac (Sep 1, 2013)

I had originally emailed the company (using the email the OP posted) with my solution image and my requested nomination info last Thursday afternoon (I'd post the email I sent them, but it contained several spoilers and personal info that doesn't need to be posted). Then I emailed them a couple more times later that day and Friday to clear up a typo I had in my original image (one of my stickers that should have had a double-number on it was flagrantly missing one of its numbers - didn't change the solution at all, just something I'm surprised I missed while I was solving it), so I re-submitted the picture on Friday with the typo corrected and cube sides re-imaged with the full number on them so they couldn't say I didn't actually submit "all the correct sides" (this is the image contained in the protected .zip a couple pages back). Still haven't had any contact back from them, though.

I do like Ollie's thought. Rather than shaming the company, it would be neat to work with them to come up with new challenges like this one. I'd say one thing that would made this puzzle harder was if they made it as a void cube.


----------



## qqwref (Sep 1, 2013)

Here are some suggestions for making a similar, but harder, puzzle:
1) Set it up so the orientation of the numbers doesn't give any clues. Perhaps instead of simple stickers, attach some kind of labeled circle on a pivot, so it can be rotated freely.
2) Use less common sequences. Most of the sequences used here (magic square, fibonacci, primes, etc.) are things I would expect any high schooler interested in recreational math to recognize on sight, even from only a few terms. I would suggest using things that are less immediately obvious but can still be understood easily enough (e.g. a random arithmetic sequence of small numbers, the factors of some bigger number, numbers of letters in English "one" through "nine", positive composite numbers, etc.). For bonus difficulty, choose sequences with numbers in common.
3) Don't include all 54 stickers. Remove some, so that the puzzle is still solvable (through logic and trial-and-error from the scrambled state), but it takes more effort to figure out.
4) Try to find a cube configuration so that some things are ambiguous. For instance, have a few edges with the same number on one of the two faces, or have an edge or corner that can be rotated freely without changing the numbers on its sides.


----------



## Frinkiac (Sep 5, 2013)

Quick update, Innovation Factory got back to me yesterday. They requested I make a video for them showing the original state of the cube (showing all 6 sides) when I copied it from their video and then going through my solving process. I just sent them the video, so we'll see where things go from here.


----------



## jwilde0926 (Oct 3, 2013)

Hey Everyone, OP here

First off, sorry for the delay in posting responses. We’ve been busy preparing for the campaign and getting everything ready and haven’t been doing well with keeping up with the posts.

Second, being new to the cubing community, I’m blown away both by everyone’s ability to figure out the solution as well as how quickly you guys came to that conclusion. With regards to the competition: yes, Frinkiac sent us a correct solution based off of the promotional material we provided and we'll be providing him with a metal cube when we complete a successful campaign. Because it was solved prior to the beginning of the competition, we decided to abandon the competition and move right into the campaign. I admit we certainly thought it was harder than it turned out to be, but again, we’re new to this area, so we have a lot to learn.

Although the novelty may be lost, we think it’s still a fun puzzle to solve. We just launched our Kickstarter campaign where we’ll be offering three different material options as well as a few supporting materials that we’re currently working on (a book about the cube as well as solution software which you guys almost certainly won’t need). If anybody has any experience with solution software and wants to share 

If you’re interested in supporting us, head over to our campaign at: www.kck.st/GzQNcL. Any support is greatly appreciated. 

Even if you don’t want to support the campaign, we’d love to hear some feedback from you guys; either about the campaign, the cube, or anything else. We do design and prototyping at our store in Chicago and it would be great to talk some of you about new puzzle ideas. Get in touch at [email protected].

Thanks!
James


----------



## KongShou (Oct 3, 2013)

jwilde0926 said:


> Hey Everyone, OP here
> 
> First off, sorry for the delay in posting responses. We’ve been busy preparing for the campaign and getting everything ready and haven’t been doing well with keeping up with the posts.
> 
> ...



awesome

when and where would we be able to buy one when it release?

also never underestimate cubers, we are scary

also just clicked on the website, it is ridiculously easy to solve, especially considering the sequences you used, they are like the most common sequence possible, 

few suggestion:
make it so that the numbers on one side are not all oriented the right way round, this make it too easy, make it so the numbers on the corner pieces are at an angle of 45 degree with the top of the number facing the corner of the cube, and the bottom are facing the centre pieces,, same for the edge pieces excpt that they are rotated 90 degrees
make the sequences harder, ie less common, so get rid of the like of Fibonacci and triangular etc.


----------



## ~Adam~ (Oct 3, 2013)

I just backed for an aluminium cube.
I hope you get the target amount =)


----------



## rj (Oct 3, 2013)

jwilde0926 said:


> Hey Everyone, OP here
> 
> First off, sorry for the delay in posting responses. We’ve been busy preparing for the campaign and getting everything ready and haven’t been doing well with keeping up with the posts.
> 
> ...



I think this will be somewhat popular. Most cubers rely mostly on muscle memory, and this will be new to them. What mechanism does it have? Is it copied off rubik's?


----------



## jwilde0926 (Oct 3, 2013)

KongShou said:


> awesome
> 
> when and where would we be able to buy one when it release?
> 
> ...



These are available currently as rewards on the Kickstarter page linked in the post above. And yes, to us this seemed extremely hard, but we've since learned that to people in the cubing community, this is a pretty trivial challenge. We'd love to do a follow-up with some input from you guys that was geared towards extremely advanced cubing while still incorporating mathematics.



cube-o-holic said:


> I just backed for an aluminium cube.
> I hope you get the target amount =)



Thanks! Really appreciate the support and we'll be working hard to make sure we get there 



rj said:


> I think this will be somewhat popular. Most cubers rely mostly on muscle memory, and this will be new to them. What mechanism does it have? Is it copied off rubik's?



We certainly hope so! And yes, the mechanism we designed is developed off of the traditional Rubik's Cube's mechanism.


----------



## ~Adam~ (Oct 3, 2013)

I'm looking forward to the challenge, although I think it will be interesting but with cubing knowledge relatively trivial (no offence meant).

Also it will be great to finally have a metal twisty puzzle in my collection.
So I guess out with the silicon and in with the WD40.
I hope it turns better than my wooden 30th anniversary cube =)

Have you posted on twistypuzzles forum yet?
I'm sure you'll get a few backers there if you haven't already.


----------



## Rnewms (Oct 3, 2013)

cube-o-holic said:


> Have you posted on twistypuzzles forum yet?
> I'm sure you'll get a few backers there if you haven't already.



http://twistypuzzles.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=26112

They don't think it is anything special.


----------



## ~Adam~ (Oct 3, 2013)

I'm definitely going to sticker mod a 4x4.


----------



## radmin (Oct 3, 2013)

I think the company is over confident in this idea. It's a supercube++

For a vast majority of speedcubers there isn't much wow factor in : special stickers with famous math sequences on the sides, plastic non-speedcubes, wooden non-speedcubes. 

There is a cool factor in an aluminum cube though. That's about it. 
The stickers could be ko'd for pennies. Plastic and wood cubes have already been done.

About the demographic: your target buyer is a solver who enjoys a new challenge. This is a smaller subset of the speedsolving community which is a smaller subset of rubik's cube owners. It's the shapeways crowd. If every single person who loved a new challenge bought one, you'd still lose money. The reason seven towns doesn't make speed cubes is because there is no money in it. Your audience is even smaller than that.


----------



## Noahaha (Oct 4, 2013)

radmin said:


> I think the company is over confident in this idea. It's a supercube++
> 
> For a vast majority of speedcubers there isn't much wow factor in : special stickers with famous math sequences on the sides, plastic non-speedcubes, wooden non-speedcubes.
> 
> ...



I agree with everything except that there's no money in speedcubes. If 7 towns released a new "Rubik's Cube that doesn't require a lot of effort to turn" and marketed it vigorously, they could even get people who already own cubes to buy new ones. I'm not saying it would be a good cube, just that people would buy them.


----------



## Mike Hughey (Oct 8, 2013)

The key to selling this is to sell it as a novelty item. If you can get traction somehow with store owners, you might be able to sell it successfully. Cubers aren't going to buy it in large quantities, although collectors might buy it.

I could see something like this selling fairly well in a place like Cracker Barrel, if you could convince them to stock it and you packaged it well.

The problem with the original idea was in making it a supercube. If you could have done something where the orientation of the numbers didn't matter somehow, it would have been a much better puzzle - you couldn't have used the orientation to figure it out. If only you had implemented it like Chris Hardwick described:



> If they made a puzzle similar to this that used numbers contained inside a plastic dome, sort of like the "googly" eyes you see on craft projects, now THAT would be a hard puzzle.
> 
> Wow, if they make "googly" numbers like this I might try to make a puzzle like that. This would completely eliminate all information gained from orientation clues, but it would also mean that it wouldn't really be a supercube either, but it would still be fun to try!


----------



## brian724080 (Oct 10, 2013)

Does it corner cut? Just kidding
Seriously though, the cube wouldn't be hard at all after you work out the solved state


----------



## Frinkiac (Dec 16, 2013)

Hi everyone! It's been a while since I've been on the boards, but I just wanted to give an update on everything with this cube.

As many may already know, the Kickstarter didn't meet its goal for Innovation Factory's puzzle, but I.F. decided to at least put the plastic version out on the market (ThinkGeek is already sold out of them, but the CEO told me they're still selling on their site (looks like 20 still in stock at $20 a pop) http://if-chicago.com/shop/uncategorized/the-magic-cube/).

They weren't able to send me the metal cube, as that was dependent on the Kickstarter reaching its goal, but they did send me a complimentary plastic cube (it's about 70mm in size, yet feels very light and stable (I think it's lighter than my Shuang Ren)). Aside from the stickers being pretty close in quality to standard Rubik's ones, I'm actually really impressed with their mechanism. It reminds me of a HuanYing internally (I don't own one, so I'm just going off looks), except it doesn't reverse corner cut at all (probably due to the corner pieces being closed off, and no Florian mod). Regular corner cutting is actually great out of the box, though (just a little less than line-to-line, but might vary, as it is tensionable), and it's incredibly smooth and quiet after lubing (initially kind of scratchy). It's not a perfect speedcube (it was never intended to be one), but given their people have no cubing background, I'm really impressed with the quality of cube they put out. Very satisfying to play with.

Like other's have pointed out, it's essentially a glorified Sudocube, but with the math series/constants on each face, it did make my inner nerd smile. Worth checking out if $20 is in your price range.


----------

