# Rubik's Cube Science Fair help.(MGLS)



## Lotsofsloths (Sep 26, 2008)

I am testing different LL methods(number of moves) for my science fair.
The quest is, should I include MGLS because it deals with more than the Last layer.


----------



## Genie1048 (Sep 26, 2008)

sure, why not


----------



## Lotsofsloths (Sep 26, 2008)

Genie1048 said:


> sure, why not



Because it includes the F2L part of the solve aswell.
And I am testing the Last Layer.


----------



## hawkmp4 (Sep 26, 2008)

You could probably pretty easily do that since you'll only need to analyze MGLS + rest of last layer compared to last slot of F2L and LL of other methods.


----------



## fanwuq (Sep 26, 2008)

No. You could expand the idea to include last slot, or exclude MGLS.

I think the idea of the project is flawed to begin with. Are you doing test solves?
It would seem that way if you are doing an experiment. Of course you can just calculate all the probabilities, but that would too quick and not fun.
Looking back at all my science project experiences, I regret them all. They were all very boring (chemistry stuff with horrible instruments). The people who did psychology always had the most fun. The best project was just a test of reaction time, play let everyone play tetris for a few hours (during class) then test reaction time again.
You could do the same thing with cubing.


----------



## MistArts (Sep 26, 2008)

fanwuq said:


> No. You could expand the idea to include last slot, or exclude MGLS.




Heise! That's take a good Heise pro to do that though. (Not me)


----------



## McWizzle94 (Sep 26, 2008)

lol i hate science fair! we had research all week and it sucked xD my project is about the Stroop effect btw


----------



## blah (Sep 27, 2008)

Err... isn't it blatantly obvious that you should include CLS and PLL, and ignore ELS? Because ELS is analogous to 4th F2L and CLS to OLL, right? Or did I misinterpret something...?


----------



## joey (Sep 27, 2008)

blah said:


> Err... isn't it blatantly obvious that you should include CLS and PLL, and ignore ELS? Because ELS is analogous to 4th F2L and CLS to OLL, right? Or did I misinterpret something...?



Meh not really.


----------



## kratos94 (Sep 27, 2008)

I think that MGLS shouldnt be in there because you are testing only last layer and MGLS involves the 4th slot which is adding a completely new variable to the whole experiment making it slightly less focusing on the last layer.


----------

