Couldn’t vote on frosting because there is no way in Hell I’m eating a chocolate cupcake.
Ok, same then. Not like my friends, who left the working side on the bottom and had to keep turning the cube to peek at what was left to do. 
“Top two layers”? There’s another layer under the top layer?
Never solved a Rubik’s Cube, but I never tried very hard. And I was only like 7 the last time I touched one.
I couldn’t vote in the ketchup poll, because there is no way in hell I’d eat anything with ketchup. I’d rather miss a meal entirely.
Yay! Another chocolate cupcake for me!
Interesting. While I can readily understand that just fiddling around without much thinking about it wouldn’t work, I always thought the whole point would be figuring out for yourself how to do it. I wouldn’t have thought it fun to follow the steps written out for me in a book.
Before the cubes came out, we used to play a two-dimensional sort of relative, made up of small numbered tiles held in a square doohicky, with one open space you could move one adjacent number into at a time, thereby also moving the open space over one place; the trick being to get them into numerical (or any other specified) order after they’d gotten scrambled. I got so I could work those moderately well, though I doubt I could do it now; I’ve forgotten the technique necessary. It never occurred to me to try to find instructions on how to solve the things. I’m sure they were easier than the cubes; but again, I thought the point was figuring it out on your own.
Any other flavor and I’d fight you for one. Chocolate…meh.
So don’t call it a party. It’s a unnatural social interaction with a group of strangers. No thanks. It’s not like I’m a raging introvert. I would be happy to spend time with a group of friends.
I also think there is nothing about being on either show that would make you a better dinner companion or whatever. Wheel of Fortune players seem to be more annoying but they are instructed to act that way. Some Jeopardy! contestants annoy me and they are just acting normal. FTR from my couch I find Jeopardy easier. My head is full of useless knowledge but I’m not good at word puzzles.
Well, that’s a good point, and people have different views on that. The thing is, to solve it yourself requires probably weeks of intensive effort in developing a full understanding of how moves affect the configuration. If you don’t know any group theory, you will at the end of that process. For some people, going through that process is the main appeal. But other people treat the cube more as a fidget toy than an object of study. And there are competitive “cubers” whose goal is to be able to solve it as fast as possible, using any techniques that work for them, not necessarily only ones they have discovered themselves. Like you wouldn’t expect a chess player to develop his technique entirely from first principles, without ever reading a book or watching other people play.
I think you’re referring to the 15 puzzle. That’s orders of magnitude easier than the Rubik’s Cube, and I think most people who play with that do indeed figure out to solve it themselves. I did when I was a kid. More recently I got a new level of pleasure out of it by writing a program to solve it. That requires not just being able to solve it, but to describe in precise detail how to solve it.
The point, I think, is that “I don’t know if I can or not; I’ve never seriously tried” makes about as much sense as an answer to “Can you solve a Rubik’s cube?” as it does to “Can you play the guitar?” or “Can you drive a stick shift?” It’s possible you could figure out how completely on your own (depending on how clever and/or persistent you are), but it would be a process, and you would only be able to say “I can do it” at the end of that process.
According to A. J. Jacobs’ book The Puzzler, which contains a chapter on the Rubik’s cube, the first person to ever solve a Rubik’s cube was Rubik himself, and it took him a month.
It’s a difficult puzzle. Much of the reason for its popularity, IMHO, is not so much its success as a puzzle but as a cool object that’s fun to fiddle around with (like a fidget spinner).
That’s a good point.
But no reading of books will teach you how to always win a chess game – because your opponent has also been reading books.
Yup, that’s the one; and yes I do expect it’s massively easier. I never even tried to work out explicit mathematical formulas for solving it; I just figured out patterns in which ones you needed to move first and how pieces needed to move it what seemed to be the wrong direction for a while so it would be possible to get them into the right places later.
That I can understand! That is, I can’t do it; but I can understand the additional level of pleasure from being able to figure it out in that fashion and to that degree.
True; but what I meant was that I don’t know whether I could accomplish the process. I suppose I took the question to mean ‘can you figure out how to solve’ instead of ‘do you know right this minute how to solve’.
Ohh, I fiddled with it for months, before buying the book, without making much progress.
I think “fiddling around to find out” makes much more sense with the Rubiks cube, or say something like juggling three balls, than it does a practical and potentially dangerous exercise like using a stick shift, or something that requires lifelong learning like playing guitar. Unless you’re a performer, the end goal of those first two is really about achieving mastery, and I could see someone preferring to find their own way there.
Not that I did that, but I can see it.
My favorite cupcake topping is a whipped cream frosting (i.e. mostly whipped cream with something to make it a little firmer).
Exactly. I was given a Rubik’s cube when they first came out, and solved it by what might have been “concentrated fiddling” with it off-and-on over a period of time(maybe most of a summer?). After the first time it became easier, but never simple, until I just lost interest in it. I can’t imagine getting a book to map out the procedure. What is the point? That’s like having numbers printed on the back of jigsaw puzzle pieces.
I mean, I feel the same way about solving a jigsaw puzzle while looking at the picture.
Well, i solved the Rubik’s cube by developing algorithms to swap or rotate pairs of cubies, and i thought it was a really fun puzzle.
That being said, i think the physical puzzle “how the hell does this thing work?” is much more interesting than the combinatoric puzzle “how can i get all the cubies where i want them?”
I no longer remember my algorithms, but i still know the general approach, and I’m confident i could work out a new set of algorithms. And I’m moderately confident i could execute them accurately enough to solve the cube.
There’s a reason my user name is puzzle gal.
I’m not especially excited about meeting either jeopardy or wheel of Fortune contenders, and I’d go to the party that had people i know at it, or that had good free food, it something.
Back when i dated, a million years ago, i didn’t want to feel i owed the guy anything, and i always insisted we each pay our share. I think I’d be more relaxed about that if i were on the dating market today, but I’d still want to feel like i was contributing. I’d probably favor taking turns inviting each other out today. But I’m not sure, having been married for years.
I’ve always gravitated towards complex instrumentals and virtuoso musicianship. I never liked pop music of any kind. In my old age I’ve come to appreciate the talent it takes to make a good pop song. Most are still awful but I do recognize that Michael Jackson had a lot of talent.