From ccw@eql12.caltech.edu Fri Aug 6 22:37:43 1993 Return-Path: Received: from EQL12.Caltech.Edu by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/archive/cube-lovers id AA09504; Fri, 6 Aug 93 22:37:43 EDT Date: Fri, 6 Aug 93 12:50:32 PDT From: ccw@eql12.caltech.edu (Chris Worrell) Message-Id: <930806124838.23c011ac@EQL12.Caltech.Edu> Subject: Re: Square-1 Puzzle Party In-Reply-To: Your message <01H1EMUZ0T1E91XFD4@delphi.com> dated 6-Aug-1993 To: CPELLEY@delphi.com Cc: ccw@eql12.caltech.edu, cube-lovers@life.ai.mit.edu Sorry. I can't let this one pass by without comment. CPELLEY@delphi.com says > Richard Snyder's book on Square-1 is now being published. He sent me the > following press release about a forthcoming Square-1 Puzzle Party: > It's really two puzzles in one! Harder than Rubik's, it's so hard that > only 5 people in the whole world have ever been able to come up with a > complete solution to it! Unless Snyder or his agent is talking about a God's Algorithm for Square-1, this statement is ridiculous. I doubt that this number includes myself, as I have only told a few family members and friends that I have solved this. (I expect many of you can say the same thing.) Harder than Rubik's? This is a matter of opinion and definition. Do they mean conceptually harder, harder to derive a solution method, harder to prove a solution method, or harder to achieve an individual solution attempt? Or does harder just mean more time? More time to derive a solution method, more time to prove a solution method, or more time to achieve an individual solution attempt? I don't really doubt the last. Except for the Pyraminx (and the 2-Cube), all of the puzzles of this type take me longer to solve than the Cube. I think that the Rubik's cube still holds the record as the puzzle that took me longest to derive a solution method. (Of course all of the others borrowed substantially from the cube.) >Bring your Square-1, your Rubik's Cube, and your other Rubik's puzzles that >you haven't been able to solve! Sorry, I don't have any. Except the 10x10 Rubik's Tangle. Chris Worrell ccw@eql.caltech.edu