## Magic 120 Cell Solve

Expand Messages
• Hello again, Well, in keeping with my tradition of solving one of these puzzles during my exam time I ve solved the Magic 120 Cell. I have to say it wasn t as
Message 1 of 5 , Dec 13, 2008
Hello again,

Well, in keeping with my tradition of solving one of these puzzles during my exam time I've solved the Magic 120 Cell. I have to say it wasn't as difficult as its large number of permutaions would suggest, just time consuming. I must say thank you for the piece finding feature since without it there is no way that I could have solved this monster.

#### 2.3 x 108126 combinations? Sounds like a lot of fun to me!

Noel
• Hi Noel, Wow, amazing! This first solution happened much sooner than I guessed (which was that this puzzle would resist for at least a year). Great job, and
Message 2 of 5 , Dec 13, 2008
Hi Noel,

Wow, amazing!  This first solution happened much sooner than I guessed (which was that this puzzle would resist for at least a year).  Great job, and I would love to hear about your experience and any feedback it may have generated.  33k moves didn't outnumber your 26k move solution of the 5^5 by too much ;)  What was your overall approach, solving in order by piece type or tackling it cell-by-cell?

I just got into Houston for a short trip, but will be back in Austin tomorrow night.  I will be sure to get the web site updated with this result then!

All the best,
Roice
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 8:38 PM, Noel Chalmers wrote:
Hello again,

Well, in keeping with my tradition of solving one of these puzzles during my exam time I've solved the Magic 120 Cell. I have to say it wasn't as difficult as its large number of permutaions would suggest, just time consuming. I must say thank you for the piece finding feature since without it there is no way that I could have solved this monster.

#### 2.3 x 108126 combinations? Sounds like a lot of fun to me!

Noel

• Yes, and a huge congratulation from me too! I m also a little surprised this happened this quickly. That said, I m not surprised that it was by you, Noel.
Message 3 of 5 , Dec 13, 2008
Yes, and a huge congratulation from me too! I'm also a little surprised
this happened this quickly. That said, I'm not surprised that it was by
you, Noel. You're a puzzling animal! I'm starting to wonder whether my
prediction that it would be a very long time, if ever, until we see a
*second* solution, might also be very wrong. What do you think, Noel?
Was it fun? Do you think you'd ever do it again? Maybe to take back the
shortest record once someone breaks yours? Please do tell us all about
monster. Most of all, aren't you glad to know that no higher dimensional
analogs exists? :) This is the end of the line for the really special
4D figures. I hope that your achievement helps you enjoy a much-deserved
relaxing holiday break.

-melinda

Roice Nelson wrote:
> Hi Noel,
>
> Wow, amazing! This first solution happened much sooner than I guessed
> (which was that this puzzle would resist for at least a year). Great
> job, and I would love to hear about your experience and any feedback
> it may have generated. 33k moves didn't outnumber your 26k move
> solution of the 5^5 by too much ;) What was your overall approach,
> solving in order by piece type or tackling it cell-by-cell?
>
> I just got into Houston for a short trip, but will be back in Austin
> tomorrow night. I will be sure to get the web site updated with this
> result then!
• Hello All, Thank you for the congratulations! To answer your question Melinda, yes it was a lot of fun and I might do it again sometime if I think of a faster
Message 4 of 5 , Dec 16, 2008
Hello All,

Thank you for the congratulations! To answer your question Melinda, yes it was a lot of fun and I might do it again sometime if I think of a faster method! ;)

As for your question Roice, the way I solved this thing is entirly similar to how I solve the 4D cubes. It seemed like a good starting point sice I solve a 3D Megaminx similarly to how I solve a 3D Rubik's cube.

Now that this project is done (it only took me about a week btw :) ), I would really like to go back to the 4D cubes but I admit, using the special features that Roice included in the program
makes the puzzle experience much more enjoyable, not to mention faster. Could we please have these kinds of features in the 4D cubes??? Please?? I think everyone would love the piece finder that Roice invented and the piece highlighting would be very useful for the larger cubes.

On another note, I know I'm not the only one that has got their hands on the new V-cubes. I think that we know we can solve the 3D 6x6 and 7x7 it would be cool to give the 4D versions a shot. Maybe after those I'll tackle the 5D versions. :D

Cheers,
Noel
• One tiny correction: I think I invented the piece finding design though it was Roice who implemented it. I m a little torn about supporting larger cubes in
Message 5 of 5 , Dec 16, 2008
One tiny correction: I think I invented the piece finding design though
it was Roice who implemented it.

I'm a little torn about supporting larger cubes in MC4D but if people
want it, I see no reason not to support it. That is assuming the
original memory explosion that happened when I initially tried that
doesn't present a problem. Perhaps more importantly, I don't want to
keep records related to larger cubes, so if people are OK with that,
I'll see what I can do the next time I work on it. That might not be for
a while as I tend to work on it between contracts/jobs, and right now
I'm happily employed working on Second Life. I would like to take a
break from that soon but things are going well there so I have no idea
when that will likely be. I definitely agree that a cubie-finder would
be extremely helpful when working on those big boys!

So you solved the 120 cell from the inside-out? Regardless, does the
program support a playback mode? In MC4D you can adjust the speed while
doing a "cheat" solve to play the solution backwards. I should really
allow for the equivalent "redo" playback to play it forward. Also, a
screensaver mode that plays forward in an endless loop would be fun too.
The loop should pause in the pristine state and do a bunch of pure
rotations before starting off again. If at all possible, I encourage you
to create a time-lapse video of your solution and post it on Youtube.
OTOH, I just did a back-of-the-envelop calculation which suggests that
even at movie speeds and one frame per twist, it could still take over
20 minutes to play! Either you'd need a higher frame rate or have to
skip several moves per frame to squeeze it into a reasonable time. Too
bad Roice's log format doesn't mark macro begins and ends, otherwise a
video or playback mode could skip over the macro details. Oh well, too
many fun things to do!

-melinda

ltd.dv8r@... wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> yes it was a lot of fun and I might do it again sometime if I think of
> a faster method! ;)
>
> As for your question Roice, the way I solved this thing is entirly
> similar to how I solve the 4D cubes. It seemed like a good starting
> point sice I solve a 3D Megaminx similarly to how I solve a 3D Rubik's
> cube.
>
> Now that this project is done (it only took me about a week btw :) ),
> I would really like to go back to the 4D cubes but I admit, using the
> special features that Roice included in the program
> makes the puzzle experience much more enjoyable, not to mention
> faster. Could we please have these kinds of features in the 4D
> cubes??? Please?? I think everyone would love the piece finder that
> Roice invented and the piece highlighting would be very useful for the
> larger cubes.
>
> On another note, I know I'm not the only one that has got their hands
> on the new V-cubes. I think that we know we can solve the 3D 6x6 and
> 7x7 it would be cool to give the 4D versions a shot. Maybe after those
> I'll tackle the 5D versions. :D
Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.