Yes, by following the directions in one of those “How to solve a Rubik’s Cube” books—which I don’t think should count the same as figuring it out on one’s own.
I was able to figure it out without resorting to a how-to manual. Basically, I played with it until I noticed that certain patterns of moves would reliably switch or rotate 2-4 cubes.So I’d start by getting the eight corners correct, then shuffling the side pieces into place one layer at a time.
If you’re able to do it without the aid of the book, I think it should count just fine. It’s not like those speedsolvers/record holders all figured it out on their own, either. (At least I doubt the majority of them did.)
I never solved it as a kid, so last year I bought one and followed some YouTube instructions until I could solve it regularly in about 3 minutes. Once the mystique was gone it got pretty boring, I put it down and quickly forgot all of the algorithms. Lately I’ve been trying to teach myself an intuitive way to solve it so I don’t forget next time, but there really isn’t one.
The problem is that you need to memorize algorithms to make certain moves, and if you’re a kid in the '80s, there’s no way you’re going to come up with those algorithms on your own unless you really sit down and start writing things out. Even then, I never would have had the patience.
I was able to get two colors on my own, but I had the book that taught the series of moves and all the variations depending on how the final (bottom) layer was configured, color-wise. I had those moves memorized at one time, until it essentially became muscle memory, and could solve them fairly regularly after that. My personal record was about 100 seconds.
But I doubt I could do it now. I might be able to remember some moves, but not necessarily the right ones, based on the color pattern of the bottom row.
Interestingly, I found that there was one situation where the moves in the book didn’t work–if it was a cube that had been taken apart and then put back “correctly”. You wouldn’t necessarily think this would change anything, but the moves in the book would sometimes just run you into circles if someone had taken the cube apart beforehand. Curious.
Huh. My brother had that book. Neat that it’s worth a little money now.
I think I still have that. I kept a Rubik’s cube on my desk and would let the kids mess with it, then amaze them when it was “solved” the next day.
I notice a common theme of people trying to solve the cube by faces: getting one color, than another, etc. AFAIK it can’t be done that way; you have to think of it as getting three layers done.
I solved it as a kid, when I was perhaps twelve years old, but my solution involved starting with the eight corners. and then the edge pieces between two corners. I worked out what I called transformations to correct the positions of various pieces of the puzzle. I was never going for speed, though. And decades later I bought a new cube and tried to solve it but couldn’t remember the moves I used.
I learned how to solve one from a fourteen year old kid on YouTube. It’s dead easy when you know an algorithm. Anyone can do it.
This, on the other hand, is an entirely different ball game. Respect.
Actually, learning an algorithm versus figuring the cube out yourself really should be two different poll options. They have about as much in common as putting together a model airplane from the instructions versus inventing heavier-than-air aviation from scratch.
I did solve it myself, algorithm-less. Took me a long time though.
Never bothered learning the algorithm. Probably because I don’t keep a Rubik’s cube around to show the algorithm to others. I do have a Rubik’s pyramid though, but that’s much easier to solve
I learned some of the simpler algorithms a few years ago and now I can do it in about two minutes. If you take time to learn and practice some more advanced moves you can get down to under 30 seconds, but I never was motivated.
It was not hard to learn. I just practiced each move a few minutes at a time while watching TV, and soon enough I could get through the entire sequence essentially by muscle memory.
Spent the summer of 1981 working it out. Just kept trying combinations of moves and noting down what they did.
I’m kind of stubborn.
A few times back in High School.
The first time was purely an accident. After that, I actually made an effort. Then, I got bored. Mostly because I couldn’t solve one in 3.2 seconds while blindfolded, handcuffed, and submerged upside down in a vat of warm maple syrup.
A guy has got to have standards.
My Pet Rock however, I solved that in less than ten minutes. On my $400 TI calculator.
I also made my own Rubik’s Cube at home from scratch out of all natural vegan ingredients.
Vega is 25 lignt-years away; how did you get ingredients from there?
I used to have a book that gave one method, but I’ve long since lost the book, and I only ever memorized three of the five steps. Much later, I developed a completely different method, mostly on my own, though I did use one transformation sequence a friend showed me. My best time is just about three minutes. I could probably do much better with a speed cube, but I’d still be nowhere near competition level: Neither my fingers nor my algorithm are all that great (when I get to the point where I’m “almost done”, and have “just one more step”, it’s still 18 more moves, when 20 actually suffices for the whole thing with a good algorithm).
And that robot linked in the OP is definitely not a world record, as it requires a modified cube (it needs holes drilled in the faces to insert the manipulators). It also requires that the human operator look at the cube and put it in in the correct orientation, as it can’t see the center faces itself (the manipulators get in the way). It’s not even the record for a modified cube, since there’s another robot that uses a similar design and is under a second (though I can’t remember its name right now). Last I heard, the official robot record is still the Cubestormer III, made from Lego, which has done it in 3.25 seconds.
Does prying it apart with a screwdriver and putting it back together count?
Ancient Chinese secret!