# Do you think ANYONE can solve a cube?



## DAE_JA_VOO (Jul 28, 2008)

Since i started cubing, i've had so many people ask me to teach them how. Some people i explain it to have no problem grasping it. For example, if i explain that you need to build a cross first, and make sure that the colours like up with the centers on the sides, some people have no problem understanding that. 

Other people that i've spoken to can't even grasp that. There's a girl i know that simply can't understand that. She can now solve the cube, after i taught her, and she knows that "the green edge piece must go over the green center" but i can see that she doesn't understand WHY. She just does it because that's what must be done.

Another example. Imagine you've got the cross built, on the bottom. You do an F2. That puts a white piece on top (assuming you do a white cross). All you need to do to finish that cross is an F2, right? This girl starts doing U and R turns. Like she can't grasp the logic behind the cube.

Now, i know that the human brain is very strong, but do you think that everyone can solve a cube?

I've come to realize that the cube is actually pretty confusing for most. I, personally, didn't solve the cube MYSELF the first time, i used a guide (i was too lazy to figure it out), but i'm 100% sure that if i were forced to solve the entire thing intuitively i would be able to, whether i try now or before i knew how to solve the cube. I don't know if i can say the same for everyone.

This isn't a "I'm smart and the world is dumb" post  I'd just like to know your views


----------



## Dene (Jul 28, 2008)

For sure, anyone can do it. They just need to want to.


----------



## MTGjumper (Jul 28, 2008)

After being able to cube for a while, I think you forget the time when you didn't understand how to solve a cube, and how difficult it might have seemed to form a cross for the first time.

When I was around the 2 minute mark, I didn't really understand what I was doing, I just did it because it was "right".

I think desire is very important if you want to solve the cube: I've managed to teach a person how to solve the first two layers of a cube (they then learnt how to solve the last layer via the internet) who I wouldn't think of having great spacial awareness, because they desperately wanted to solve the cube. On the other hand, I've tried to teach academically gifted people who are good at maths but with only a passing desire to solve the cube, but they couldn't manage it.


----------



## ajmorgan25 (Jul 28, 2008)

MTGjumper said:


> After being able to cube for a while, I think you forget the time when you didn't understand how to solve a cube, and how difficult it might have seemed to form a cross for the first time.
> 
> When I was around the 2 minute mark, I didn't really understand what I was doing, I just did it because it was "right".
> 
> I think desire is very important if you want to solve the cube: I've managed to teach a person how to solve the first two layers of a cube (they then learnt how to solve the last layer via the internet) who I wouldn't think of having great spacial awareness, because they desperately wanted to solve the cube. On the other hand, I've tried to teach academically gifted people who are good at maths but with only a passing desire to solve the cube, but they couldn't manage it.



I think this just about sums it up. While they might say they want you to teach them, it might not make that big of a difference whether or not they figure it out. For example, at school I had quite a few people asking me how to solve it once I started showing them sub-30 times. I taught a few people and it ended up taking about a week to teach them. We had one or two free classes throughout the day to work on it.

However, I had another kid that was in Drumline with me that _really_ wanted to learn how to solve it. So I promised him that I'd show him on a trip to Savannah, GA. I taught him in about two or three hours including the downtime to let him practice a step I just showed him. So actual teaching time and interaction with me was more than likely less than an hour. I was actually very impressed. He completely understood how the entire first layer worked which is one of the harder things to get beginners to understand in my experience.


----------



## nitrocan (Jul 28, 2008)

i dont think so. some people are just too retarded (i try to teach making the cross, then he goes away saying that its too complicated after trying for 10 seconds). and not wanting to learn does not mean he / she can learn


----------



## tim (Jul 28, 2008)

Dene said:


> For sure, anyone can do it. They just need to want to.



That's so true.


----------



## mrbiggs (Jul 28, 2008)

I think it's got something to do with the ability to visualize spacial relationships. I've had the same experience you had; some people I taught got it pretty quickly, some could never even get the cross consistently.

It also shows up in how long it took people to solve the cube the first time, for those who did it. It took me three or four months and my solution was only about 80% complete (there were a couple cases I still couldn't handle, mostly relating to edge orientation), but I've heard of people doing it in a week or less.

I don't know if everyone could figure out how to solve a cube, assuming that they're willing to dedicate a fair amount of time to it and there's no time limit. I'm pretty sure that almost everyone can be taught to do it, however.


----------



## fanwuq (Jul 28, 2008)

I wouldn't say _anyone_, there are exceptions. (vegetables, people with amputated arms and legs, dead people, people with some mental diseases, people who don't have curiosity, people who don't have patience,...). Most people should be able to at least solve it if they try.


----------



## alexc (Jul 28, 2008)

Can anyone solve it? Yes, anyone can learn if they have the motivation to learn and practice a little. Can everyone do it sub 20? No.


----------



## badmephisto (Jul 28, 2008)

Yes anyone can solve it. The entire difference is in how much time it would take for them to learn it. Some smarter individuals take a day, some others take more. 
I've taught... at least about 15 or 20 people how to solve it, from scratch. And I'm not exaggerating. From that, only 2 people were able to learn the whole thing in a single day. Actually one of them I taught F2L right away as an experiment, and he kinda understood it  He did a really inefficient version of F2L, but it worked. I wonder if it was because he was so smart, or because I am that good  probably a little bit of both. 

Anyway, it depends LARGELY on your teaching skills too. I know by now very well exactly what people get confused with, and i try clear up those points right away. For example, nobody ever realizes that each piece has its own unique position it has to end up in. Or even that there are pieces at all! This is all obvious to us, but not to a beginner. Not at all.


----------



## crabs!!! (Jul 28, 2008)

alexc said:


> Can anyone solve it? Yes, anyone can learn if they have the motivation to learn and practice a little. Can everyone do it sub 20? No.



Everybody with a normal intelligence can solve the cube in sub 20 seconds. They just have to have the will to do so and put in the hard work to get there. I don't believe that certain people will always be better than you because of "talent", I believe that they have worked harder and longer than you have.


----------



## PCwizCube (Jul 28, 2008)

fanwuq said:


> I wouldn't say _anyone_, there are exceptions. (vegetables, people with amputated arms and legs, dead people, people with some mental diseases, people who don't have curiosity, people who don't have patience,...). Most people should be able to at least solve it if they try.


My 16 year old brother is autistic and I taught him how to solve the first layer in like 20 minutes. He had no problem understanding it.



badmephisto said:


> Anyway, it depends LARGELY on your teaching skills too. I know by now very well exactly what people get confused with, and i try clear up those points right away. For example, nobody ever realizes that each piece has its own unique position it has to end up in. Or even that there are pieces at all! This is all obvious to us, but not to a beginner. Not at all.


Yes, I totally agree with this.



tim said:


> alexc said:
> 
> 
> > Can everyone do it sub 20? No.
> ...


Yes why not? If they try hard for several months than that is possible.



My 12 year old cousin could solve one layer, not just one side, with no one teaching him. But he did it his own inefficient way, paring up an edge with a corner and so on until the first layer was done. When I tried to teach him the cross, he got confused and gave up (after like 2 minutes ).

I think if someone is very eager to learn how to solve the cube, he will concentrate a lot about what you are you doing and will understand better. Someone who is not eager will get bored after like 1 minute.



DAE_JA_VOO said:


> Another example. Imagine you've got the cross built, on the bottom. You do an F2. That puts a white piece on top (assuming you do a white cross). All you need to do to finish that cross is an F2, right? This girl starts doing U and R turns. Like she can't grasp the logic behind the cube.


Yeah I was teaching someone the cross and when all you needed was an F2 to put the edge piece down, he kept on doing other moves. Kind of weird and he was pretty eager.... :confused:


----------



## tim (Jul 28, 2008)

alexc said:


> Can everyone do it sub 20? No.



Why not?


----------



## nitrocan (Jul 28, 2008)

if you can solve it, sub 20 is just about dedication.


----------



## flee135 (Jul 28, 2008)

MTGjumper said:


> After being able to cube for a while, I think you forget the time when you didn't understand how to solve a cube, and how difficult it might have seemed to form a cross for the first time.
> 
> When I was around the 2 minute mark, I didn't really understand what I was doing, I just did it because it was "right".


That is definitely true. I started with the Petrus method, and even though it was an intuitive block-building method, nothing made sense. I had move sequences that worked every time for each step. Even though Petrus is so flexible, I did not understand it, so I could only rely on certain move sequences for every step.



badmephisto said:


> Anyway, it depends LARGELY on your teaching skills too.


Yes, that's one of the most important aspects as well. Work with what they already know, and work on explaining what is difficult to understand. If they know how to solve one side, expand on that, and teach them to place certain pieces in certain areas so that they can solve one layer instead of one side. If they don't remember last layer algorithms, make some mnemonics to help them remember it.



Dene said:


> For sure, anyone can do it. They just need to want to.


YES!


----------



## joey (Jul 28, 2008)

Rubik's Cube Fan said:


> fanwuq said:
> 
> 
> > I wouldn't say _anyone_, there are exceptions. (vegetables, people with amputated arms and legs, dead people, people with some mental diseases, people who don't have curiosity, people who don't have patience,...). Most people should be able to at least solve it if they try.
> ...


I don't think autism comes under some of the things fanwuq said. Autism on the whole doesn't affect intelligence or understanding.


----------



## Ton (Jul 28, 2008)

Anyone that *wants* to solve it, yes.


----------



## CharlieCooper (Jul 28, 2008)

Rubik's Cube Fan said:


> My 16 year old brother is autistic and I taught him how to solve the first layer in like 20 minutes. He had no problem understanding it.



being autistic *really* does not prevent somebody from being able to cube. in some instances, it is actually a bonus.


----------



## Johannes91 (Jul 28, 2008)

Rubik's Cube Fan said:


> My 12 year old cousin could solve one layer, not just one side, with no one teaching him. But he did it his own inefficient way, paring up an edge with a corner and so on until the first layer was done. When I tried to teach him the cross, he got confused and gave up (after like 2 minutes ).


Eh, starting with cross is not efficient at all. What he did was possibly much better, though it's not clear from that description.

Noobs who know nothing about other methods but blindly assume that Fridrich is "the best" and suggest it to everybody make me sad.


----------



## Crzyazn (Jul 28, 2008)

I started 2 friends cubing. One friend is my "competition" at sub25 (we started at around the same time) and the other is pretty decent at sub30.


----------



## MechaTech84 (Jul 28, 2008)

> Noobs who know nothing about other methods but assume that Fridrich is "the best" and blindly suggest it to everybody make me sad.


 
This is exactly why I personally think that Fridrich is NOT the best method. Now, I am *NOT* saying I know for sure what the best method is and can beat everyone here in execution, not by far. What I *AM *saying is that since almost everyone assumes it is, very few people even try to perfect their execution of any other methods, or even look into other methods.

While I do agree that OLL/PLL is probably the best way to solve the last layer, I also think it is not the only good way to finish the cube. Personally, I find great interest in other methods, especially those that either combine the F2L and LL, or don't solve layer by layer. 

Now I realize that it is the only proven method, but think about it this way: How many months of practice did you go through just to be able to solve the rubik's cube sub-20? Personally, I think that If someone wants to disprove another method, they should work on the other method longer*. But I think the most important (and hardest to find) is that the person still work with the same passion as they had with learning the first method. Also, they should never work on their first method while in the process of learning the new method, they should use nothing but the new method and algs that apply to it.

Sorry for ranting so much, but this is one thing that bugs me... To clarify something though, I personally am trying to learn Fridrich and my PB is only 26.65... But what I try to do is this: keep an open mind. While I focus mostly on Fridrich algs, I also try to learn other methods, and even try to create my own. If you made it this far in reading this I thank you for hearing me out.

-Mecha

*I say longer here because of this: if you are learning fridrich as your first method, and then go to learn a new method, Even when doing the new method, your mind will be trained to do the first method. And I think that it's reasonable for your mind to take more time to get accustomed to the new method, what to look for, etc.


----------



## joey (Jul 28, 2008)

It makes me sad that you can blindly suggest that Fridrich is not the best because other people blindy suggest it is.


----------



## Hadley4000 (Jul 28, 2008)

fanwuq said:


> I wouldn't say _anyone_, there are exceptions. (vegetables, people with amputated arms and legs, dead people, people with some mental diseases, people who don't have curiosity, *people who don't have patience*,...). Most people should be able to at least solve it if they try.



Rules me out 


I really do think that anyone can. Most people think they can't, so don't want to attempt in fear of looking like an idiot by failing. It's just a matter of being able o follow steps.


----------



## badmephisto (Jul 28, 2008)

Last time I checked most of the best speedcubers in the world use Fridrich method or variation of there of. People that don't realize this make me sad


----------



## Stefan (Jul 28, 2008)

DAE_JA_VOO said:


> i explain that you need to build a cross first


But ... why do you lie to them?


----------



## PCwizCube (Jul 28, 2008)

Johannes91 said:


> Rubik's Cube Fan said:
> 
> 
> > My 12 year old cousin could solve one layer, not just one side, with no one teaching him. But he did it his own inefficient way, paring up an edge with a corner and so on until the first layer was done. When I tried to teach him the cross, he got confused and gave up (after like 2 minutes ).
> ...


My cousin locates a random corner and edge, and pairs them up (not permuted correctly.). He repeats this until the entire side is done. Then he permutes the pieces by taking a piece out and putting where it's supposed to go. That isn't really efficient, but he figured it out himself, and I didn't tell him ANYTHING about how to solve the Rubik's Cube before. It takes him like 2 minutes to do it.


----------



## hawkmp4 (Jul 28, 2008)

StefanPochmann said:


> DAE_JA_VOO said:
> 
> 
> > i explain that you need to build a cross first
> ...


That actually made me laugh out loud.
As I was reading this thread, I was thinking, I can teach up to LL to pretty much anyone within an hour. But some people have trouble with LL...
Wouldn't Roux be an interesting experiment to teach first time cubers? Its more intuitive, from what i've seen, and after the two 2x2x3 blocks i've been able to solve it without ever learning a Roux algorithm. Granted I understand the cube a lot better than beginners but I think in the end it could be easier.


----------



## cmhardw (Jul 28, 2008)

I think we all have a lot of opinions on this. To the OP I do know what you mean about how sometimes you meet a person who, when you try to teach what we would consider simple concepts like the cross, they don't understand. Over the years I've probably taught about 75 people to solve, and I found that the error in their not understanding was my teaching method.

For people who can't grasp the cross, I now start by completely disassembling the cube, and showing them how it is built and how the pieces move around the axes. If they still don't get it, I give them puzzles like the checkerboard pattern, or the spot puzzle. Once they get a feel for the easier puzzles, and how the pieces move around, then I come back to the cross. The cross is not, in my opinion, the first place to start. It is several steps ahead of what we would consider the most basic concepts for a cube.

The record student I've ever had was a brilliant math student who learned the entire solution in just under 60 minutes, in one sitting. He even recalled the solution and could still solve a couple weeks later. So I have also seen what you mean about students who just seem to "get it" right from the start.

I compare the difficulty of solving a cube to driving a car with a manual transmission, especially when I am talking to non-cubers. Image if you were 10 years old and had never driven a car before, and someone put you in a car and started trying to teach you how to drive stick shift. Now image that you are having a hard time learning how the gear shift works, and when to shift and how to shift. Now image the person teaching you being flustered at how you can't grasp such a simple concept as changing gears.

I don't mean to come across mean, but I think anytime a student who genuinely has interest to learn does not seem to grasp it, that it is the teacher's fault for not teaching to their learning style. It can also be the teacher's fault for not taking them back to the point that they understand and starting there. If I start teaching someone who has never driven a car before how to read traffic lights, and which side of the road to drive on, then I am not starting them off at the right point. The cross is a more advanced concept than I think we give credit to, when you ask non-cubers to try to do it.

And to answer your original question, yes I think anyone who has the interest to learn can learn. The youngest student I have ever personally taught was a 2nd grader. It took us almost 4 weeks to get through the entire solution, including puzzles and disassembling the cube for her, but she is now a solver. Just teach to their learning style, and anyone will absorb the information you have to give like a sponge.

Chris


----------



## nitrocan (Jul 28, 2008)

after i learned it, i tought it to 9 people in my class in a week, and they spreaded it  now we have more than 20 people that can solve it in the school


----------



## alexc (Jul 29, 2008)

tim said:


> alexc said:
> 
> 
> > Can everyone do it sub 20? No.
> ...



Think about this: Do you think *EVERYONE* has the dedication to reach sub 20? Let me rephrase it like this: *Can* everyone do sub 20? Maybe yes, but what about older people whose fingers can't do fingertricks efficiently or get a proper turning speed for sub 20? *Will* everyone learn to do it sub 20? I think you would agree that that is almost certainly a no.


----------



## Mike Hughey (Jul 29, 2008)

alexc said:


> tim said:
> 
> 
> > alexc said:
> ...



I was thinking this too - I suspect some older folks would have to be outrageously dedicated to be sub-20. And there are probably plenty of people with arthritis for whom it would require almost superhuman effort to achieve it. (Note the word "almost". I've seen some people do amazingly difficult things, so maybe if they wanted to badly enough, they could.) I must admit, though, that I'm starting to believe I could probably make sub-20 if I try hard enough. I'm still not sure if I'll ever try hard enough, though. Maybe.


----------



## tim (Jul 29, 2008)

alexc said:


> *Will* everyone learn to do it sub 20? I think you would agree that that is almost certainly a no.



That's definitely true, but the question was "Can everyone do it sub 20?". And the answer is yes, if they practice. It's obvious that people who don't practice will never reach sub-20.



alexc said:


> but what about older people whose fingers can't do fingertricks efficiently or get a proper turning speed for sub 20?



They are worth dying . Seriously: I thought it was clear, that we are only talking about people how are physically capable of solving the cube.


----------



## ShadenSmith (Jul 29, 2008)

Mike Hughey said:


> alexc said:
> 
> 
> > tim said:
> ...




If you put in half the effort you put into BLD, you'd be sub-20 in no time. That's a lot of effort though.


----------



## fanwuq (Jul 29, 2008)

CharlieCooper said:


> Rubik's Cube Fan said:
> 
> 
> > My 16 year old brother is autistic and I taught him how to solve the first layer in like 20 minutes. He had no problem understanding it.
> ...



Yeah, that could be a bonus! Rubik's Cube Fan, maybe if your brother practices, he'll be faster than you.


----------



## PCwizCube (Jul 29, 2008)

fanwuq said:


> CharlieCooper said:
> 
> 
> > Rubik's Cube Fan said:
> ...


Nah, he doesn't want to learn how to solve the rest even though I've asked him several times. He says everyday, "You're so obsessed with the Rubik's Cube"

The South Taiwan Summer 2008 is on August 30, and he is going to Taiwan at that time this year (not me, ) and I asked like 10 times, "Want to go see people solve the Rubik's Cube in like 15 seconds?" The answer was "No" every time.


----------



## kkohlmorgen (Jul 29, 2008)

I am going to say no, I have met a girl as well who REALLY wants to solve it but when I tell her to move a piece she will move a completely different face, I gave her one of my cubes and see has been at it for like a month and she doesn't understand how to move a freakin piece!


----------



## Mike Hughey (Jul 29, 2008)

ShadenSmith said:


> Mike Hughey said:
> 
> 
> > alexc said:
> ...



Made me laugh.


----------



## hawkmp4 (Jul 29, 2008)

Yes, my brother is autistic also, and I know he could learn to solve a cube.
It just doesn't interest him at all. That's a real big thing for some autistic people, even more so than "regular" (I hate that word) people. Motivation can be the hardest part.


----------



## slncuber21 (Jul 29, 2008)

yes i believe anyone can do the cube, they just need to have the patience and the 'drive' to do it. (kinda like Dene said)
and after i teach a certain step of the cube to someone i always ask if they understand the step, even if its why you do a U' or move this out of the way- i still ask.

From hawkmp4- "Yes, my brother is autistic also, and I know he could learn to solve a cube.
It just doesn't interest him at all. That's a real big thing for some autistic people, even more so than "regular" (I hate that word) people. Motivation can be the hardest part."

agreed, my brother has Autism too, he can take a somewhat mixed up cube (like 3 or 4 turns) and solve it, then i applaud him and he just laughs and smiles (hes 5)

i tried teaching him the cross idea, but he just said, " Sarah- you do it. Do it fast please."

it is mostly a motivation problem for anyone, having a mental illness or not.


----------



## blah (Jul 29, 2008)

Is autism exclusive to the male population? (Really, no offense meant to the people up there, or their brothers, I'm just a little shocked to find that suddenly so many people seem to have autistic brothers, and they're all brothers.)

I've tried my best to phrase whatever I said in a non-hurtful way so please don't be offended, it's really just a question out of ignorance.


----------



## hawkmp4 (Jul 29, 2008)

No no! I'd much rather people ask questions than go on knowing nothing about it. 

Anyway, I don't remember the numbers, but its at least twice as prevalent in males as females.


----------



## ThePizzaGuy92 (Jul 29, 2008)

after teaching my girlfriend over the course of several months, I'm convinced ANYONE can do it, hahah


----------



## CharlieCooper (Jul 29, 2008)

blah said:


> Is autism exclusive to the male population? (Really, no offense meant to the people up there, or their brothers, I'm just a little shocked to find that suddenly so many people seem to have autistic brothers, and they're all brothers.)
> 
> I've tried my best to phrase whatever I said in a non-hurtful way so please don't be offended, it's really just a question out of ignorance.



i am female 

in england apparently it's a 3:1 boy to girl ratio, i imagine that statistic is applicable elsewhere.


----------



## DAE_JA_VOO (Jul 29, 2008)

Interesting answers, thanks guys.

So we all agree that pretty much anyone can learn then?

Maybe i just have VERY little faith in the girl i tried to teach


----------



## cmhardw (Jul 29, 2008)

kkohlmorgen said:


> I am going to say no, I have met a girl as well who REALLY wants to solve it but when I tell her to move a piece she will move a completely different face, I gave her one of my cubes and see has been at it for like a month and she doesn't understand how to move a freakin piece!



This is exactly the kind of thing I talked about in my post. Have you disassembled the cube for her, to show her how the pieces move? If so, have you given her simpler puzzles (not trying to solve the cross) to see if she can understand how to move blocks of pieces that are the same color rather than focusing on individual pieces? If you've done that too, have you tried popping out that particular edge or corner piece you are having her focus on while describing that step, to make it clear that each part is an individual piece?

How would you feel if you were 10 and thrown into a car for the first time and told to drive, and then your teacher got mad that you couldn't figure out how to shift gears while driving? I mean come on..... it's simple to change gears.... why don't you get it?

See what I mean? I'm not picking on you, but it's precisely this attitude that people have toward non-cubers who don't get it off that bat that I think is why we maybe don't explain concepts to non-cubers as clearly as we should. Try being more patient with her, I think you'll be surprised at the result.

Chris


----------



## nitrocan (Jul 29, 2008)

well lets not say everybody, some people unfortunately dont have hands or feet (not that its possible to reach sub20 with feet)


----------



## badmephisto (Jul 29, 2008)

nitrocan said:


> well lets not say everybody, some people unfortunately dont have hands or feet (not that its possible to reach sub20 with feet)



win. thank you for pointing out that solving the rubik's cube is impossible without limbs.


----------



## CharlieCooper (Jul 29, 2008)

badmephisto said:


> nitrocan said:
> 
> 
> > well lets not say everybody, some people unfortunately dont have hands or feet (not that its possible to reach sub20 with feet)
> ...



i would enjoy it if somebody made a video of them solving with just their chin.


----------



## Rabid (Jul 29, 2008)

Anyone can solve. _Eventually_. I don’t think spatial recognition is always teachable; some people _may _have to rely on alternate systems. Even some speed-cubers don’t _fully _visualize the movements. They rip the boxes on pure rote algs. 

Like most people, I started without any guide. I figured out the single face fairly quickly, but the concept of alignment (permutation?) didn’t kick in until I started trying to solve the second layer. After a few hours of frustration locked on the first level, I needed (wanted) a hint and found the Petrus Sytem online. It was enough of a conceptual push to keep me interested. The F2L make sense to me, although my spins may be a bit wonky and sub-optimal. The LL is still a bugaboo. I suspect most people need old fashioned trial and error to solve it without algorithms. Burn out is more than likely.


----------



## hawkmp4 (Jul 29, 2008)

CharlieCooper said:


> badmephisto said:
> 
> 
> > nitrocan said:
> ...


Well...not chin...but...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pB8XedMowDU
=)


----------



## Lotsofsloths (Jul 29, 2008)

If someone WANTS to do it, and really WANTS to be able to do it, they can.
If someone thinks it will take no effort and wants to do it, the won't succeed.

The only reason I learned it(http://peter.stillhq.com/jasmine/rubikscubesolution.html) within 2 days, one for F2L and one for the LL was because I was good with cubes already, I guess you could call me a speedcuber before I even knew how to solve it 

I used to "speedsolve" one side.
I could usually get it within 15 seconds.
This really helps xD


----------



## fanwuq (Jul 29, 2008)

CharlieCooper said:


> badmephisto said:
> 
> 
> > nitrocan said:
> ...



Is that a challenge? I'll do it! (Just hope that Lucas Garron won't beat me there.) Can I use ryanheise sim instead?


----------



## benjediman (Jul 29, 2008)

back in my high school, per batch is divided in sections accordingly to their academic standing, meaning if you did well the last year, you stand a chance to get into the "star" section the next year.

i was able to teach a guy from the lower section. i dont think he's good in math. we did it in 1 hour, including all the practices. he was able to solve it since then. if he didn't have spatial recognition and all that stuff, i think he wouldve had a hard time learning it, and especially remembering it afterwards.

so yeah, how important do u think spatial recognition is? and how much people have it?


----------



## CharlieCooper (Jul 29, 2008)

fanwuq said:


> CharlieCooper said:
> 
> 
> > badmephisto said:
> ...



yeah, the chin challenge! go go go!


----------



## MTGjumper (Jul 30, 2008)

CharlieCooper said:


> Yeah, the chin challenge! go go go!




With feet took me 13 minutes, and I couldn't see any way in which I would be able to turn a side initially; I'm in the same predicament with using my chin, but I'll try anyway...


----------



## CharlieCooper (Jul 30, 2008)

MTGjumper said:


> CharlieCooper said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah, the chin challenge! go go go!
> ...



i will be extremely upset if you do not


----------



## Brett (Jul 30, 2008)

I've only taught 3 people. One is some kid in my spanish class failing like all his classes, the other 2 are valedictorians of their respective years. Anyone with intrest and who is physically capable can do it.


----------



## samsung4123 (Dec 11, 2008)

lol! its quite annoying to be teaching someone who takes more than a week to get the first edge for the cross... some people i teach dont know which way clockwise is and theyre in highschool xD


----------



## Escher (Dec 11, 2008)

whoooooa big bump of a dead thread there my friend!

generally, people are going to find that annoying... so my advice is to not do it!

and i agree. that is annoying.


----------



## fanwuq (Dec 11, 2008)

CharlieCooper said:


> fanwuq said:
> 
> 
> > CharlieCooper said:
> ...



Hahaha! I remember that. I failed.
I think I managed to make one turn, and it was in the wrong direction.


----------



## nitrocan (Dec 11, 2008)

Hey people, don't disturb the dead.


----------



## CharlieCooper (Dec 11, 2008)

true, annoying to have a bump, but let's be honest, if the poster had started a new thread saying the same thing, we would have flamed him/her and said "USE THE SEARCH FUNCTION"


----------



## nitrocan (Dec 11, 2008)

Yeah it's interesting. It's like if you fail to write a reply to a thread, you lose your chance forever. How about we find a solution to this?


----------



## Erik (Dec 11, 2008)

I thought it was obvious that it's better to revive an old thread if you have a new insight on that specific subject than it is to make a new one? How can you shout at a person who makes a new thread without seeking if you don't even know the the better alternative would be?


----------



## shelley (Dec 11, 2008)

It kind of depends. Would samsung4123 have posted a new thread about how dumb his acquaintances are if he hadn't found this old one? I doubt it.

I think bumping old threads is permissible if someone wants to add a new insight or point of discussion that hasn't been covered already, or maybe ask for clarification about something in the old thread. Bumping an old thread to basically say "yeah, me too!" doesn't really qualify.


----------



## Bryan (Dec 12, 2008)

samsung4123 said:


> lol! its quite annoying to be teaching someone who takes more than a week to get the first edge for the cross... some people i teach dont know which way clockwise is and theyre in highschool xD



Then perhaps you should revise your method of teaching. Have them put all the white edges on the yellow face first (order doesn't matter), and then have them move them up to the white layer.

Yeah, it's not as efficient, but it'll help them solve.


----------



## Erik (Dec 12, 2008)

To be on topic:
Everyone with normal or even low intelligence can learn how to solve a cube but only IF:
- he/she is being tought WELL
- he/she is being tought a good method (ex AVG's beginners')
- he/she is willing to put some effort in it


----------



## ImNOTnoob (Dec 12, 2008)

Solving a cube is something, SPEEDsolving a cube is something else.

Speedsolving a cube requires much more effort than solving a cube.


----------



## Sin-H (Dec 12, 2008)

Lotsofsloths said:


> ...I guess you could call me a speedcuber before I even knew how to solve it
> 
> I used to "speedsolve" one side.
> I could usually get it within 15 seconds.
> This really helps xD



I'm sorry to dig this post out of the past, but I also used to speedsolve one layer in 15 seconds. This was like 3 days after I started working on the cube. One week after, I already did speedsolving in the area of 1 minute 

so I quite also was a speedCUBER before I knew how to solve the cube.


----------



## (X) (Dec 12, 2008)

I think anyone can learn to cube, but it will take time in some cases. When someone just dont get the idea of the easy moves to get the cross they will have serious problems later.


----------



## shelley (Dec 12, 2008)

It's always better if the student has played with a cube on their own enough to understand how things move. Even better if they can figure out a layer on their own, which is not an unreasonable expectation for most people if you give them enough time to work on it before jumping straight into instruction.

There are people out there who were successfully taught how to cube, but they only know it as a rigid step-by-step process starting with a certain color and only that color. If you did an OLL on the red face and handed it to them, they would have to go through and rebuild the white cross, complete the white layer, etc.

Which is kind of silly and indicates lack of real understanding, possibly a result of being taught how to solve the cube before really grasping how the cube works. Color neutrality should be trivial if you understand the process of how the cube is solved. It's only when people want to get faster that they start abandoning color neutrality to benefit recognition time.


----------



## ConnorCuber (Dec 13, 2008)

Something that has to do with that, shelley, is taking the cube apart and showing them how the pieces move, while they are learning to solve it, they should then have a better understanding of the cube.


----------



## Odin (Dec 13, 2008)

ya i think any one can solve a cube, but it also depends on the teacher. The girl you say "This girl starts doing U and R turns. Like she can't grasp the logic behind the cube." but isn’t "grasping the logic behind the cube" and actually solve it 2 different things entirely? I’m pretty sure ANY one (including some monkeys/dolphins (if dolphins had fingers)) can solve a cube but, grasping the logic takes time to learn and maybe for some people impossible to learn .Any one can solve a cube because a algorithm for a cube is more a less a pattern that you repeat, if you have the ability to memorize/read them of a web site or paper and turn the cube, any one can solve any cube.


----------



## hippofluff (Dec 13, 2008)

I would be more impressed if a rubik's cube solve with someones eyes then someone breaking the world record (yes that will possibly be the dumbest thing you heard in a long long time)


----------



## MTGjumper (Dec 13, 2008)

If I saw someone solve the cube with their eyes, I'd be impressed. That'd be painful, no?

Unless you meant someone solving it by themselves using logic...


----------



## Odin (Dec 13, 2008)

lolz @ eyes not being able to turn a cube


----------



## d4m4s74 (Dec 13, 2008)

When I saw a video telling how to solve the cube I noticed it could be done much faster, and right now freestyling the first layer is much faster then following the directions from the video
I never learned the "rules" for solving the cross, I just did it

anyone can solve the cube following the "rules", but not everyone can freestyle it


----------



## Escher (Dec 13, 2008)

meh, i know a girl who intuited the entire cube including the sune, but couldnt do PLL... admittedly, we gave clues (as in 'ok, youve done a layer, now do the second one'), but nobody actually taught her ANYTHING. she learnt how to PLL, but she cant be bothered to solve much anymore


----------



## a small kitten (Dec 14, 2008)

I definitely think anybody can do it. Just don't get intimidated by it and it should work out with some practice. However, things are much easier with the sexy move.


----------



## daniel0731ex (Dec 14, 2008)

CharlieCooper said:


> Rubik's Cube Fan said:
> 
> 
> > My 16 year old brother is autistic and I taught him how to solve the first layer in like 20 minutes. He had no problem understanding it.
> ...



i'm slightly autstic. (i think it's called...er...ummm.... is it spelled 'assburgers'? i have problems with spelling )


----------



## Crickets (Dec 15, 2008)

I think anybody can solve the cube if they really try.

I really tried and solved it in a day. Of course I messed up so much when trying to insert the middle edges, that that is when I really grasped the logic of the cube. And lots of people that I have talked to the cube about have thought the same thing that I thought. That you can move the stickers around without moving other stickers. But as we know thats impossible unless u take the stickers off lol

But yeah I understand about the cross thing. Cause one of my smartest friends who is actually going to college to become a teacher can't figure out the cross.


----------



## fanwuq (Dec 28, 2008)

fanwuq said:


> CharlieCooper said:
> 
> 
> > badmephisto said:
> ...



Finally did it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xi9iYlwK5iM&feature=channel_page


----------



## Ryanrex116 (Dec 29, 2008)

I think too many people think of the cube as "54 things that move around randomly" I understood the cube better when I disassembled. 

I had no problems learning how to do the cross and finishing the first layer, and I memorized the beginners method algs in 2 days.


----------



## JTW2007 (Dec 30, 2008)

I think there are two types of people. Those who can solve the cube and those who won't. Some people "can't" because they're lazy, but I think everyone is capable if they put enough work into it. Some will naturally be better than others though.


----------



## mrCage (Feb 26, 2009)

Hi 

I'd say about 25% can do it. Half may have the determination. Half may have the required skills. Assumiong these are randomly distributed we get that 1/4 can actually do it ...

Per

Ooppss. Bumping, hehe ;-)


----------



## Deleted member 2864 (Feb 26, 2009)

I think it's all about patience, attention span, and desire to decode a plastic toy that has frustrated people for over 20 years. I've been able to teach a few people but most just give up, which just shows me that they don't really care. It's really not that hard, it's just that mainstream culture made it look impossible and that you have to be a genius to do it. The colorful monster just intimidates them.


----------



## darkzelkova (Feb 26, 2009)

most can probably do it


----------



## AvGalen (Feb 27, 2009)

aznmortalx said:


> I think it's all about patience, attention span, and desire to decode a plastic toy that has frustrated people for over 20 years. I've been able to teach a few people but most just give up, which just shows me that they don't really care. It's really not that hard, it's just that mainstream culture made it look impossible and that you have to be a genius to do it. The colorful monster just intimidates them.



If most give up, you might need to teach a simpler method or explain it in a simpler way.

Also, look here: http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/showthread.php?t=9527


----------



## 4weeksAndImSub60 (Feb 27, 2009)

DAE_JA_VOO said:


> Since i started cubing, i've had so many people ask me to teach them how. Some people i explain it to have no problem grasping it. For example, if i explain that you need to build a cross first, and make sure that the colours like up with the centers on the sides, some people have no problem understanding that.
> 
> Other people that i've spoken to can't even grasp that. There's a girl i know that simply can't understand that. She can now solve the cube, after i taught her, and she knows that "the green edge piece must go over the green center" but i can see that she doesn't understand WHY. She just does it because that's what must be done.
> 
> ...



I understand where you are coming from dude. I think it's possible for everyone to solve the cube. I myself have tried teaching multiple people as you have. And just like you, I've had people that can't even make a cross. Now, I also understand that everyone learns things in different ways (even though the school doesn't fully recognize it and continues to teach things however they desire) so after each failure at solving the cross or whole cube, I would try again and explain it to them in different ways. I've done this MANY times to a few people, and they still cannot solve the cube. Maybe I'm being optimistic when I say that everyone can solve a cube, even though not everyone I've taught has learned how to solve it. 

Nice part about doing U and R turns to solve a cross piece when a F2 is only needed. Even I new that before I solved the cube.


----------



## WaffleCake (Feb 27, 2009)

Well, no, I don't think anyone can do it. Some just don't have the mental (or physical) ability to solve it, and most can't grasp it easily enough to want to learn.


----------



## goldencuber (Feb 27, 2009)

4weeksAndImSub60 said:


> DAE_JA_VOO said:
> 
> 
> > Since i started cubing, i've had so many people ask me to teach them how. Some people i explain it to have no problem grasping it. For example, if i explain that you need to build a cross first, and make sure that the colours like up with the centers on the sides, some people have no problem understanding that.
> ...



Essentially anyone could solve the cube, but the person's logical reasoning (intuition) is the determining factor of what the person will get. If they don't understand the "why?" part of how things are done, then they'll end up relying on algorithms. I find that I can't teach people how to reason out the cube, only the answers to various cases (like I'd teach the person the case where F2 is necessary). For one person I had to give them algs for every step, for another I really only needed to explain concepts, and let them figure out the rest.
Sometimes i try to force the person I'm teaching to use their head, since if they don't get the simple concepts they'll never understand Fridrich F2L later, though i give algs if they're about to give up. (kind of like what I do on our school website http://www.rca.byethost17.com)


----------



## shelley (Feb 27, 2009)

WaffleCake said:


> Well, no, I don't think anyone can do it. Some just don't have the mental (or physical) ability to solve it, and most can't grasp it easily enough to want to learn.



True, some people are just hopeless. But I think that population is much smaller than what most people would expect it to be. Due to the reputation of the Rubik's cube, a lot of laypeople just have the attitude that it's too hard, that only "geniuses" can solve it, so they don't even try to understand, even though they certainly have the mental capacity to do so if they were willing to put forth just a small amount of effort.

I like to tell people, if a 3-year-old child can learn how to solve the cube, there's no reason you can't!


----------



## bamman1108 (Feb 27, 2009)

I think everyone has the physical ability to solve the cube, but I don't think anyone can solve the cube.

I don't mean that someone can't look up a solution and solve it with algs and en explanation for the moves, but most people today would immediately think that memorizing 100s of letters would take weeks, which is much too long for someone with a minute long attention span. Where I live (Florida), many people are just so lazy and used to things being done for them, that the don't even realize how quickly things can be done with even a little effort. One kid in one of my classes said it must've taken a week to learn just 1 algorithm.


----------



## Gparker (Feb 27, 2009)

I think anyone who can read and has commen sense can, i taught my dad a week ago and now he cant stop solving it


----------



## hippofluff (Feb 27, 2009)

I do think that any *normal* person (not having any disabilities) would be able to solve the cube. Although some may take longer then others .... way longer. I have taught many various people how to solve the cube and I have seen all different results. It took me 1/2 hour for me to teach someone how to get the cross where another student had me show him what it looked like and he did. I think it may take someone up to a year to learn how to solve the cube, even when they are dedicated (in very severe cases), but I do believe it may take somebody that long. Some poeple are very normal, but under their guilty skin they hold a mental-cube-retardation.


----------



## goldencuber (Feb 27, 2009)

shelley said:


> WaffleCake said:
> 
> 
> > Well, no, I don't think anyone can do it. Some just don't have the mental (or physical) ability to solve it, and most can't grasp it easily enough to want to learn.
> ...



Definitely, some people just think that solving the cube is for geniuses, and people like that who try give up if they don't immediately get it.

Admittedly though, intellect does play a role in cubing. I find that some people improve dramatically faster than others, even if the other people practiced more.
Although...there comes a point when practice overtakes talent


----------



## Chuberchuckee (Feb 27, 2009)

Anyone with a functional brain, (a) functional hand(s), and a right attitude can solve a Rubik's cube. The attitude part is certainly the most important aspect. I've met so many people who haven't even held the cube for 15 minutes, and give up, saying "Meh, I will never be able to solve the Rubik's cube" or "I give up this Rubik's cube thing." Their saying becomes a self-fullfilling prophesy, they program themselves to think they can never do it, and they end up likely never solving the cube in their life.

I've also met people who express interest in speedcubing and are willing to learn. Those are the people with the right attitude, and I make sure that they get interested by giving them tips and resources.

My motto is: "If someone has done before, I can sure as heck do it too."


----------



## ExoCorsair (Feb 27, 2009)

Wow, thread necro, and from Per too. :|

Didn't the US Open 2007 establish that anyone can solve a cube?


----------



## AvGalen (Feb 27, 2009)

ExoCorsair said:


> Wow, thread necro, and from Per too. :|
> 
> Didn't the US Open 2007 establish that anyone can solve a cube?



I thought http://www.worldcubeassociation.org/results/c.php?i=Cornell2007 was your first competition


----------



## Unknown (Feb 27, 2009)

I think anyone (with the physical capability to play with the cube) can solve one.
It depends on motivation and also the method they learn first.
Solving a cube will not give them anything, it's not an exam where they will get marks or something like that.
So they need the sense of achievement to continue learning how to solve a cube.
When they already fail at the first step, the cross, it's clear, that they think all following steps will also be impossible for them.

So in my opinion it would be a better to teach a very routine method first, forgetting all these logical stuff on the cube.
When I start to learn how to solve the cube, I watched "pogobats" Video on youtube. This is a very routine method, where you have to do some R' D' R Ds only to solve one corner-piece or something like that.
After solving the whole cube with this method i get my sense of achievement, which gets me later on to find out shortcuts, the logical stuff on the cube and then the fridrich method.


----------



## kjeldsen (Feb 27, 2009)

fanwuq said:


> Finally did it:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xi9iYlwK5iM&feature=channel_page



I lol'ed. I've alawys been an advocate for the ROF2L alg. I'm glad to see it's gaining ground in chin-solving.


----------



## Tac (Nov 12, 2012)

Dene said:


> For sure, anyone can do it. They just need to want to.


Sure anyone can solve but the amount of effort needed varies immensely. I picked it up in about 20mins and was solving wereas there is this kid on my bus who can't solve it after weeks of explaining.


----------



## NevinsCPH (Nov 12, 2012)

Patience is an important role, so is determination.


----------



## Ross The Boss (Nov 21, 2012)

i once taught a little autistic boy how to solve it. i could only teach his non autistic brother how to do the first layer. its amazing how the mind works.


----------



## Kyooberist (Nov 21, 2012)

They think they can learn to solve it in 10 minutes.


----------



## TheNextFeliks (Nov 21, 2012)

Anyone can learn if they have the devotion.


----------



## cowabunga (Nov 21, 2012)

Very few can solve the cube on their own.
MOST people can learn to solve the cube with help.


----------



## AkitakaPS (Nov 23, 2012)

anybody can solve it. They just have to beeelllliiiiieeeeevvvvveee


----------



## googlebleh (Nov 23, 2012)

Kyooberist said:


> They think they can learn to solve it in 10 minutes.



Lucky you. Many people have asked me to teach them in 5 mins or less.


----------



## Kyooberist (Nov 23, 2012)

googlebleh said:


> Lucky you. Many people have asked me to teach them in 5 mins or less.



Their question: Can you teach me?
What they mean: Can you tell me the moves while I do them?


----------

