From BRYAN@wvnvm.wvnet.edu Wed Jan 11 16:21:44 1995
Return-Path:
Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/archive/cube-lovers id AA03957; Wed, 11 Jan 95 16:21:44 EST
Message-Id: <9501112121.AA03957@life.ai.mit.edu>
Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)
with BSMTP id 3326; Wed, 11 Jan 95 15:04:55 EST
Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (NJE origin BRYAN@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU
(LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 4406; Wed, 11 Jan 1995 15:04:54 -0500
X-Acknowledge-To:
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 1995 15:04:43 EST
From: "Jerry Bryan"
To:
Subject: When is 4x4x4 Solved in GAP?
In-Reply-To: Message of 01/08/95 at 13:47:00 from ,
Martin.Schoenert@Math.RWTH-Aachen.DE
On 01/08/95 at 13:47:00 Martin Schoenert said:
>Mark Longridge wrote in his e-mail message of 1995/01/03
> ... I don't know how a normal 4x4x4 could
> be represented though.
>Jerry answered
> I fail to see the problem. Just number the facelets. The only
> problem would then lie in deciding what the generators are -- i.e.,
> which kind of slice moves do you accept. You would also have to
> decide whether to model the invisible 2x2x2 inside, but again if you
> did, just number the invisible facelets and include their movements
> with your generators.
>The problem is that many different positions all look solved. For
>example, you can permute the 4 center facelets of one face or exchange
>two adjacent edges, and the cube still looks solved (of course you cannot
>do all this independently). So if we take the obvious permutation group
>on the 6*16 points, then a whole subgroup would correspond to what a
>puzzler would consider solved states. If by a model we mean a group
>whose elements correspond to the different states a puzzler would see,
>and whose identity corresponds to what a puzzler would consider solved,
>then I have no good idea how to model the 4x4x4 cube as a permutation
>group.
Start by numbering all the facelets and defining your generators (about
which there might be some controversy), and call the resulting group G.
Decide which permutations you consider equivalent and call this set K.
K would probably include such things as the whole cube rotations C,
as well invisible permutations of the four center facelets, etc.
In most reasonable choices for K, K would certainly be a group. Your
model then becomes the set of cosets G/K (which is *not* a factor
group! I am learning.). The questions then become: 1) can you define
an operation on the cosets G/K such that G/K is a group, and 2) can you
find a mapping from G/K onto a subgroup of G such that the mapping
respects costs? If the answer to both questions is "yes", then it is
this subgroup of G which you would want to put into GAP.
By the way, I am sensitive to the distinction between G and CG, but in
the case of any Face centerless cube such as 2x2x2 or 4x4x4, it would
seem to me that the distinction is less important than in cubes with
Face centers such as 3x3x3 and 5x5x5.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Robert G. Bryan (Jerry Bryan) (304) 293-5192
Associate Director, WVNET (304) 293-5540 fax
837 Chestnut Ridge Road BRYAN@WVNVM
Morgantown, WV 26505 BRYAN@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU