Message #261

From: Roice Nelson <roice@gravitation3d.com>
Subject: Re: [MC4D] Shortest
Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 10:25:12 -0500

RemiQ,

I had done a post about it, but I guess that might have been before you
joined the group. I just looked it up though, and you can get to it here:

http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/4D_Cubing/message/102

It was based on a sequence Matt Young had figured out to create a new
shortest solution. His post was here:

http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/4D_Cubing/messages/92

If you are interested in studying what we did, there might be other relevant
posts around that time too.

I think my last effort is just about at the limit of what I can do, though
randomness will give solution lengths a certain distribution. I thought
when someone breaks it next time, it would be a good excuse to try to write
a 3^4 computer solver that was efficient, which is why I found Don’s program
really interesting. If it was successful, the discussion of whether it
would even count or not would have to take place :)

Roice

On 5/30/06, thesamer@interia.pl <thesamer@interia.pl> wrote:
>
> It’s me again.
>
>
> Roice I don’t think you will be crushed.
>
> Without macros you probably eat us alive!
>
> How the hell you did circa 300 moves on 3^4 ?!
>
> Some time ago I tried make my shortest solution on this…
>
> And a get your result… but I have only! 1x 4C piece on the corect
> spot…15 left…
>
> I really did my best. Puting 2 pieces for one sequence…
>
> But still I’m far away in bushes ;-)
>
>
> Are you using some other method?
>
> I tried to think with Miachal some kind a F2L on 4D … but it was too
> hard…
>
> On 2^4 I invented column method which gave mi 136 moves…(with controling
> from 3^4 it would be less moves) but here it’s not use…
>
>
> That’s all,
>
> RemiQ
>
>