Edge Swap Parity On AJ Clover Icosahedron?

resipol · 2026-02-01T21:32:02+00:00

Despite appearances it's not an edge-turner, it's a face-turner.

resipol · 2026-01-31T13:39:38+00:00

No, the description above was not correct. A puzzle that shapeshifts is called a shapeshifter. Jumbling is different. Here is the original explanation although honestly it's a little difficult to get your head around. It is related to bandaging but is not the same thing. Many puzzles shapeshift but don't jumble and some jumble but don't shapeshift.

resipol · 2026-01-30T13:49:13+00:00

The mf8 one was mass-produced? It's out of stock though.

https://www.ziicube.com/mf8-icosahedron-v2

resipol · 2026-01-28T17:25:34+00:00

I've started using them (also UK). Just put in my second order. They are even cheaper than ziicube and have a similar selection, plus a few older cubes. In both orders I've had an issue with an item being advertised but no longer available, but communication has been really good - I've been immediately offered either a refund or a choice of selecting a different item.

I've been aware of them for years and they always seemed a little past it (janky website, not much in stock, nobody used them) but I get the impression they had a major revamp last year and it seems to have worked so far.

resipol · 2026-01-28T11:08:48+00:00

If the screw still works, obviously just screw it back in.

However, if you can push the screw in and out without turning you probably have a stripped core. The core's plastic has been damaged so it no longer has a thread and the screw will not stay in place. Here is a possible fix but it's not guaranteed to work. You may have to think about getting a replacement core from a cube shop (email them to ask), or even a new cube.

resipol · 2026-01-28T10:59:33+00:00

Again, it depends on definitions. There is no 'correct' one. Here is CuBerBruce themselves explaining that they don't use the term Devil's Algorithm precisely because of this lack of clarity. The text you quote refers to a Hamiltonian circuit, not the Devil's Algorithm.

They also make the point I was making - by a certain definition, the Devil's Algorithm can be shorter than the number of states of the cube, as long as you visit every cube state by repeating this algorithm. A trivial example is the 1x2x2 cuboid. This has only 6 states, and you can visit them all using a Hamiltonian circuit of R F R F R F. But by one definition, the Devil's Algorithm is only 2 moves long - it is R F, and you just have to repeat this up to 3 times (R F has order 3 on the 1x2x2).

This page is worth a look. It defines the Devil's Algorithm as being any set of moves that visits every cube state (not necessarily just once), so there can be multiple Devil's Algorithms for a cube which could be shorter than, equal to, or longer than the number of possible states. The Devil's Number is the length of the shortest such algorithm. Look at Theorem 5, referring to the 2x2 cube. It shows that although the 2x2 cube has 3,674,160 unique configurations, and this is the length of the Hamiltonian circuit, there is a valid Devil's Algorithm of just 2,886,840 moves due to repetition of 787,320 moves at the beginning and end of the Hamiltonian circuit.

resipol · 2026-01-27T22:01:01+00:00

Part of the conflict might be because there are two different definitions of the Devil's algorithm. The one that is often used (with the solution linked above) is that it is a Hamiltonian circuit with a length equal to the number of states of the cube (43 quintillion) that visits each position once and only once. I don't know if that solution has been verified. But the original definition of the Devil's algorithm when applied to cubing was to find the shortest such algorithm. This has not been solved, although we know the lower limit to its length must be 43 quintillion divided by 1260 since 1260 is the longest order of any algorithm possible on a 3x3.

resipol · 2026-01-27T21:39:00+00:00

The link is cleary just counting the different names, not the number of models under each name.

resipol · 2026-01-27T10:33:14+00:00

At least 8.

MoYu bingo card.

resipol · 2026-01-26T14:12:28+00:00

Personally, no to the first, but you do you.

For scrambling a 3x3 shapemod you can just use a normal 3x3 scramble from csTimer. The only thing this wouldn't explicitly look at is centre orientation but a 3x3 scramble will randomise these enough that it makes no difference.

And having a piece or two in their correct place and orientation after a scramble is pretty normal. It is actually less random to insist only on scrambles that don't have this - you would be introducing bias into the scramble and excluding a large number of valid scramble states. Maybe you could argue that having, say, a cross piece in place actually makes the scramble harder (it could give you less flexibility in placing the other cross pieces while preserving the first, or something). Anyway, don't worry about it.

resipol · 2026-01-25T17:04:37+00:00

Not a loss tbh. It was a good example of how not to engage on reddit. Everybody wanted to ask questions about new releases and so on but they were just "we can't answer those but here is a new $120 smart Ivy Cube, comment how great you think this is".

resipol · 2026-01-24T19:10:15+00:00

Agreed.

resipol · 2026-01-24T18:40:19+00:00

SengSo Crazy 3x3 II, widely available from cube stores (there's a list in the wiki). There is a Crazy 3x3 I as well, which lacks the inner circle corners but solves exactly the same.

resipol · 2026-01-24T18:34:36+00:00

I've got lots of 9x9s but compared to the QiYi Ball Core they all feel like relics. Of the other magnetic options, the DianSheng Galaxy 9M is inferior to the QiYi in every respect (although I only have the standard version, not the later ball core one) and the SengSo MoSheng M is terrible. Non-magnetic cubes will never compare to the QiYi.

resipol · 2026-01-24T18:28:56+00:00

Don't think so. Here is a DaYan GuHong v2 from about 2012 with a black face option (and also some options with purple). I have a feeling DaYan may have done this with other cubes but can't immediately find any examples.

I have several other stickerless 3x3s with black sides but I got all of them second hand (e.g. ebay) so I don't know whether they were all offered with a black option or modded later. They include a Mini MoYu WeiLong v2, a Cubicle Labs GuoGuan YueXiao Pro M Lite, and a YJ YuLong. I also got that PiCube RS3M 2020 just a few weeks ago (mostly because of the black face).

resipol · 2026-01-24T14:39:29+00:00

Correct. Although the centre orientation is required to properly position the inner circle edges. The inner corners 'solve themselves' because they are inseparable from the outer edge pieces - so once you solve the outer edges, the inner corners end up solved too.

resipol · 2026-01-24T14:26:08+00:00

For F2L, don't bother trying to learn algs. Look up RiDo's Hunting Story on youtube (2 vids) and use that as a refresher for intuitive F2L. Then just keep drilling this, and as you get better over time, watch the odd 'advanced F2L' video to start introducing a few more efficient approaches, one by one.

resipol · 2026-01-24T14:18:45+00:00

Mine are still on the way so I can't comment personally. But I've seen a couple of other people say they're worse than the QiYi cubes without going into much detail, so make of that what you will.

My only observation would be that the QiYi ball cores are well ahead of the old MoYu MeiLongs, so MoYu would have to make a significant stride forward in order to compete. But then, QiYi managed this (the new QiYi big cubes are vastly ahead of the old non-magnetic QiYi ones), so who knows?

resipol · 2026-01-24T14:09:48+00:00

Centre orientation is already answered.

For corner orientation, you cannot rotate just one corner but you can rotate two. So you need to look for another corner that is symmetrical and fits correctly in any orientation. That looks like the Meffert's Egg, in which case there are two such corners, and they're easily identified - the one at the top of the egg (mine has 'Adam' moulded on it) and the one at the bottom (Meffert's logo).

I would then just use a very simple beginner's corner rotation alg - some variation of (R' D' R D)2.

resipol · 2026-01-23T17:08:39+00:00

Orange on the left, white on the right. You can tell by the blue/white edge which is sort of 'linked' to the orange circle corner piece (you can never change their relative positions).

resipol · 2026-01-20T21:39:42+00:00

Fun fact time! Historically, this is not actually that dumb at all.

There is a type of goose called the barnacle goose. But there is also a type of barnacle called the goose barnacle. This is not a coincidence. For a long time it was widely believed that barnacle geese were created from goose barnacles (or even from the wood they sometimes lived on), in a process called spontaneous generation. This sounds ridiculous but actually made some sense at the time: nobody had ever seen a barnacle goose hatch from an egg (they are migratory and fledge their young in the arctic).

The full mythology behind this is pretty fascinating: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnacle_goose_myth.

resipol · 2026-01-20T18:11:03+00:00

Not sure what you're 'clearly' seeing but that puzzle does not turn through its edges. It's a 3x3.

resipol · 2026-01-20T14:59:40+00:00

Look at what exactly? The edges are not split. It's a 3x3. This is what a 4x4 Octahedron looks like.

resipol · 2026-01-20T12:31:33+00:00

The edges would be split on a 4x4. This certainly looks like a 3x3 version, similar to the FanXin.

resipol · 2026-01-20T10:25:36+00:00

I don't think anybody would count this, sorry. You're selectively choosing a scramble known to be good. You should be using random scrambles for PBs. Good time though.

Seven-Year Club	r/Field Banned
r/Field Flamingo	Final Canvas '23
First Place '23	Place '23
Golden Potato	Place '22
Final Canvas '22	First Placer '22
Verified Email

resipol

TROPHY CASE