Jenny? I’ve got her number. Unless she changed it.
I have a Rubik’s Cube Guy in my art class. Somewhere in the back of my mind I always kind of figured he memorized the positions, too. :o But I guess I never really thought much into it, or I would have realized that was impossible. I’m guessing the people that ask you questions just don’t spend THAT much time contemplating the mysteries of the Rubik’s Cube.
FWIW, I think the piling on the OP is completely uncalled for. I didn’t think it was jerkish, and even if I had then the subsequent clarifications would have dispelled that notion for me. IMHO, it was a legitimate and amusing mild rant. Don’t sweat it.
I figured out the pyramind one.
However I think that may be the Rubik’s cube for stupid people.
But hey! I DID IT DAMMIT!! 
The OP has still neither confirmed nor denied whether public displays of cube prowess result in offers of sexual favors from spectators.
Myself, I would suspect that an 11-second solution would have to be from some kind of fluke starting position, that just happened to be, oh, nine moves away from being perfect. Now, of course, it’s still pretty impressive to be able to find those nine moves and perform them in 11 seconds… though it could have just fallen into line as they followed their usual pattern - click click click, wow, two sides are done already, click click - holy crap click I’m click almost click click DONE!!
When they first came out, I got one and couldn’t solve it.
The little kids in my neighborhood could. Little shits.
I saw a book called “You too can solve the cube,” with a picture of geeky kid wearing coke-bottle glasses on the cover showing the cube to another kid. I refused to buy it.
Instead, I smuggled my cube into the bookshop, held the book open, and worked a chapter a day. I first learned how to do one side, then one side with the adjacent top layer, then the middle squares, and so on.
From that point on I could do the cube in my sleep. I’ve completely forgotten how to do it now.
And even if did remember, there’s no fucking way I would publicly report my time on the internets to the thousandth of a second.
Actually, no. An 11 second solve (for the best in the world) is rare, but not unheard of. And 11.14 seconds is the official record, meaning that (A) it wasn’t “lucky” (there are precise definitions about what constitutes a “lucky” solve) and (B) that it happened during a competition. Here is a page showing the average of 100 consecutive solves by some of the best in the world.
To consistently solve in under 20 seconds, at least 100 or so procedures must be memorized. And you need to turn the sides quickly, so cubes must be lubricated (I’ve found that KY Jelly is most effective here).
And to Scumpup et al: shockingly :eek: , I’ve never been offered anything in the way of sexual favors as a result of my mad cube skillzzzz. Although one must hold out hope.
And thanks, Dead Cat
Well, all I can say is that there are other uses for K-Y.
from an 80’s kid who couldn’t solve the effing thing, but could get one side, so faced that solved side towards the room and called it a day.
And no, speaking as a female–doing a Rubik’s cube that fast will, if anything, make me averse to using that K-Y with you. Thoughts spring to mind of life getting and too much time on hands etc.
But congrats on doing it! (I’m just jealous).
That’s how I solved it, too. And it only took me 0.3 seconds to throw it at the wall.
Are we talking getting laid here or cubes? Just needing the clarification is all.
I’m curious now. Can you give me an idea of what sort of thing is in those definitions?? Without getting too technical, hopefully.
Even if it was a really fast time? Solving the cube in under a minute is pretty cool. Hell, this thread made me want to go out and buy a Rubik’s Cube and listen to Duran Duran, how 80’s is that.
I wouldn’t post my time since it was really pedestrian (in my case, it’d be ‘never’), but if I could solve it in less than a minute? You bet I’d brag.
I checked out one of the sites on how to solve the Cube. It just made my head hurt.
There’s a thread here on people thinking they’re ‘the best’ in a particular video game. No one is equating ‘I got top score in Super Mario Bros’ with anything other than what it is - being good at a video game - but it’s harmless fun/boasting. I just wish I had something I could brag about, 'cause I suck at video games and the like.
Welp, I find the OP’s claim a might dubious because of the thousandth-of-a-second timing. How de hell is that calibrated? Does he have sensors on all the puzzle faces that signal boolean flags to a remote timer?
I know track races can be timed to the nth degree because of lazer beams and crap, but Rubik Cubes? C’monnnnnnnnn…
I’m guessing he entered a competition? If I could solve a cube in under a minute, I know I would…
Anyway, after reading this thread, I had to go out and buy a rubik’s cube. I was surprised I remembered how to do most of it, but - like when I first had one back in the 80s - got stumped on the last layer. I checked one of the rubik cube sites, realized what my error was, and can now solve it in about five minutes. Cool! And I owe it all to this thread.
Probably wouldn’t get my laid, of course. So thank goodness I already have a gf 
With the help of the parachute pants? The ladies won’t stand a chance.
There are only two ways that corner could have got twisted around like that. Either your father took the cube apart and put it back together with the corner twisted, or the corner’s internal knob got worn into a ball shape, allowing it to spin freely. Even if the cube was worn down, it would be difficult for a corner to get twisted because of the other pieces pressing on it.
Are you 100% sure about this? I thought it was possible to get any piece except the centers into any position (within the limitation of edges go to edges, corner go to corners) and in any orientation. If that’s true, it’s possible to solve the puzzle with one corner in the wrong orientation.
It’s been proven that certain configurations are impossible without disassembly. I couldn’t find a page with a good explanation of the proof, but here’s the Wikipedia entry on the subject:
Nope. Both edge and corner pieces must preserve “parity” (though they preserve their own parities, separately). It’s impossible to have all 8 corner pieces in their correct positions, and also have all except one piece in the correct orientation.
Similarly for edge pieces: you can’t have all 12 of them in their correct positions, but have just one of them flipped.
