[math-fun] Instant Insanity
Does anyone understand the solution presented at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant_Insanity ? (I don't.) More broadly, does anyone know of SOME way of solving the puzzle that doesn't involve a goodly amount of trial-and-error? Jim Propp
The solution method is not too hard. There are a lot of college math departments with explanations; google “Instant Insanity”. It involves finding suitable graph paths, pretty nifty. Rob Stegmann (Wikipedia ref 4) has a good discussion of II (and many other puzzles) on his web page. I believe his solution counts are, unfortunately, flawed. I did a big analysis of II, a variant called Devil’s Dice, and variants, last summer. My writeup is not quite suitable for prime time, but I’m happy to send it to anyone that wants it. It is computer analysis, not human useable graphic analysis. — Mike
On Jun 29, 2016, at 3:32 PM, James Propp <jamespropp@gmail.com> wrote:
Does anyone understand the solution presented at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant_Insanity ?
(I don't.)
More broadly, does anyone know of SOME way of solving the puzzle that doesn't involve a goodly amount of trial-and-error?
Jim Propp _______________________________________________ math-fun mailing list math-fun@mailman.xmission.com https://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/math-fun
More broadly, does anyone know of SOME way of solving the puzzle that doesn't involve a goodly amount of trial-and-error?
I recall from many many years past that II was easy to solve if you assumed it had a unique solution. That forced the orientation of one of the cubes [or something like that] and after that it was pretty easy to get the rest. /Bernie\ -- Bernie Cosell Fantasy Farm Fibers mailto:bernie@fantasyfarm.com Pearisburg, VA --> Too many people, too few sheep <--
On Jun 29, 2016, at 12:32 PM, James Propp <jamespropp@gmail.com> wrote:
Does anyone understand the solution presented at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant_Insanity ?
(I don't.)
More broadly, does anyone know of SOME way of solving the puzzle that doesn't involve a goodly amount of trial-and-error?
Jim Propp
This is reasonably fast: 1. Arrange the cubes on a table in a horizontal stack, say along the x axis. 2. By turning cubes about the x axis, make the side facing you (+y) and the opposite side (-y), a permutation of the four colors. Get good at this because you’ll have to do it again! 3. Rotate each of the cubes 90 degrees about z, the vertical axis, but keep them stacked along x as in 1. 4. Repeat 2. 5. Rotate each cube by 90 degrees, now about the y axis. -Veit
Perhaps I replied too simply. Your question may be not, “How do you perform the graphical solution of Instant Insanity?”, but “Why does the graphical process work? What if, instead of cubes, the puzzle had dodecahedrons or some other shape, or was in 4 or 5 dimensions, or had some other complicated variation? Would the graphical approach work as is, or need adjustment, or totally fail?” That is a much deeper question, about which I have no idea. — Mike
On Jun 29, 2016, at 3:32 PM, James Propp <jamespropp@gmail.com> wrote:
Does anyone understand the solution presented at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant_Insanity ?
(I don't.)
More broadly, does anyone know of SOME way of solving the puzzle that doesn't involve a goodly amount of trial-and-error?
Jim Propp _______________________________________________ math-fun mailing list math-fun@mailman.xmission.com https://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/math-fun
participants (4)
-
Bernie Cosell -
James Propp -
Mike Beeler -
Veit Elser