From cube-lovers-errors@mc.lcs.mit.edu  Thu Jul 31 17:38:54 1997
Return-Path: <cube-lovers-errors@mc.lcs.mit.edu>
Received: from sun30.aic.nrl.navy.mil by mc.lcs.mit.edu (8.8.1/mc) with SMTP
	id RAA22750; Thu, 31 Jul 1997 17:38:53 -0400 (EDT)
Precedence: bulk
Errors-To: cube-lovers-errors@mc.lcs.mit.edu
Mail-from: From ponder@austin.ibm.com Thu Jul 31 16:55:58 1997
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 1997 15:52:23 -0500
From: ponder@austin.ibm.com (Ponder)
Message-Id: <9707312052.AA16660@roosevelt.austin.ibm.com>
To: Cube-Lovers@ai.mit.edu
Subject: Rubik's octahedron's etc.
Cc: ponder@austin.ibm.com


I have a Rubik's Cube and a Megaminx Dodecahedron. There
are some tetrahedral puzzles available but they do not
correspond precisely to the Rubik's cube, in that they do
not have well-defined center pieces and the corners are
freely rotating. As far as I can tell, nobody has an octa-
hedron or an icosahedron that works on these principles
either.

Its hard to expect the puzzle companies to come out with
anything like these since they're in it for a profit. I
heard that Meffert's company closed down before they could
produce most of the puzzles they intended. Does anyone
have designs for puzzles like these that could be built in
a machine-shop? (Preferably that you've already patented,
to eliminate any legal concerns!!). I imagine I could try
to hack something together, but it would take an awful lot
of trial-and-error especially since some internal designs
would hold together better than others.

I'm publishing a paper in the Journal of Recreational
Mathematics on solving these other puzzles, but it would
be real nice to have demo models, even if it takes some
work. The Octahedron is particularly interesting because
it forbids edge-flips and it would be more convincing if
I do more than show it on paper.

Thanks,

	Carl Ponder
	ponder@austin.ibm.com