Message #4009

From: Luna Harran <scarecrowfish@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [MC4D] Re: Proposed scrambling notation for the physical 2^4 [3 Attachments]
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2018 01:38:32 +0000

Changing the slab move doesn’t make much of a difference, true. I guess
it’s up to you if you want to bother. Right to left or left to right is
just preference too. Although the scrambles won’t just be mirrors of each
other.

I also wrote a python program to generate scrambles in my notation, but
could you explain the logic behind yours? I can tell that specifying the
pieces by colour, but what are the numbers? Orientation?

I personally don’t have the patience to reassemble the puzzle as a
scramble. I find hunting for the right piece surprisingly time-consuming,
and considering I do a lot of solving on the go, it’s not really an option.
It does seem like a good method for a thorough scramble though.

~Luna

On 7 Mar 2018 01:30, "pentaquark394@yahoo.ca [4D_Cubing]" <
4D_Cubing@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

[Attachment(s) <#m_-8870901422857357622_TopText> from pentaquark394@yahoo.ca
[4D_Cubing] included below]

I don’t think changing the slab move face meaningfully adds to the
scrambling, so might as well always do U. I also prefer moving the right
slice to the left.

There are 24^2 distinct elements, so counting tells us that 10 minimum are
needed to reach all states. Probably ~15 elements should be enough for a
through scramble.

Speaking of which, I wrote some code in Python to assemble a puzzle into a
solvable state.

https://pastebin.com/kY2v4pPg

Pic 1 shows what a solved puzzle might look like if it happened to come up
as a scramble.
Pic 2 shows how to put the puzzle back into its normal shape to solve.
Pic 3 shows what the scramble below looks like when implemented.

yrgv-02 wogm-30 yrbm-13 wrbm-21 wogv-03 yobm-31 wrbv-02 wobv-20

wobm-30 yogv-12 yogm-21 wrgv-21 yrbv-31 yrgm-32 yobv-21 wrgm-32