User talk:Arjun sunel/Solvability of a 3x3x3 Rubik's Cube State?: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
(→WTF?) |
(→WTF?) |
||
Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
:If there is interest in this then understanding how these rules extend into 4 dimensions as an attempt to visualize and solve 4D Rubik Cubes is even more interesting.--[[User:Nigel Galloway|Nigel Galloway]] ([[User talk:Nigel Galloway|talk]]) 13:36, 13 April 2013 (UTC) |
:If there is interest in this then understanding how these rules extend into 4 dimensions as an attempt to visualize and solve 4D Rubik Cubes is even more interesting.--[[User:Nigel Galloway|Nigel Galloway]] ([[User talk:Nigel Galloway|talk]]) 13:36, 13 April 2013 (UTC) |
||
:I only noticed when I checked the Recent Changes, the title of this section is unacceptable.--[[User:Nigel Galloway|Nigel Galloway]] ([[User talk:Nigel Galloway|talk]]) 13:38, 13 April 2013 (UTC) |
Revision as of 13:38, 13 April 2013
WTF?
This article seems to not be totally uninteresting but should it really be on Rosetta-Code?? Isn't that some kind of elaborate spam? --Grondilu (talk) 12:11, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
- I would make a page Rubiks Cube which explained the cube and it motions: including a naming scheme for each square, a scheme for describing moves. As children of that I would add tasks based on Rubik's Cube which can be solved by a computer. Three suggested here are: Permutation Parity Test; Corner Parity Test; and Edge Parity Test. I think each of these would be worthy of a task in their own right, and others could be added.--Nigel Galloway (talk) 13:31, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
- If there is interest in this then understanding how these rules extend into 4 dimensions as an attempt to visualize and solve 4D Rubik Cubes is even more interesting.--Nigel Galloway (talk) 13:36, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
- I only noticed when I checked the Recent Changes, the title of this section is unacceptable.--Nigel Galloway (talk) 13:38, 13 April 2013 (UTC)