Friday, 21 April 2017

Rubik's Cube





These cube really sucks: I think like that since the first time someone gave it to me and I tried to play with it. I recently got interested in it because an academic said it was a mathematical problem. It indeed involves permutations and we should all feel like putting that all down on paper and play with its mathematical elements. This fellow works with Number Theory and I got a YouTube video of his. I then watched a few YouTubes about the cube, lots of men claiming to have solved it quite easily and being there to teach us. Some of the videos made me believe that if I moved the cube in a repetitive manner, but always using the same rule, it would solve itself. I thought that was possible, so that I did try for a while, copying what I thought I saw one of them doing. Took too long, I gave up on that method. I then watched another YouTube where the guy claimed to have an algorithm, which I gladly copied and tried. (I did buy a cube, but I only invested 6 dollars of my money in it). The algorithm certainly did not work. I did try to apply it carefully and I even repeated it, since the guy claimed that you could start from any scramble and it would always work: It was just that sometimes you had to repeat it. Others then appeared saying, later on, that only if you scrambled in the reverse way, which is exactly what I concluded they did, you could use the algorithm to get to the solution. I then watched a few other people, those looking and sounding nicer, more helpful, and those talked about the logic involved in the cube: Always a center that never moves, and therefore determines the colour of the face. The necessity of trying to get not only the surface colour right, but the lateral ones matching the centers. I also remembered the past, when I saw a few people doing the cube and the facts I had observed as they did it, such that the colour you start with matters. A few YouTubers seem to be addicted to white first. Most of the people who I saw solving it start with blue and red completed, like full faces, all in place. By using the objective data given by them, I was able to get all in place but a few, about five to ten squares missing. I then got sick of it again. First of all, it ends up making you become addicted to the thing, since there is always something new: If it is not the technique involved, then it is the speed. When you get good at it, you will probably want to have your YouTube or get into competitions, something like that. Besides, it develops nothing in your brain, hands, and spirit. It brings you loneliness, since you become a slave of the thing, it brings you boredom, since it is all the same all the time, and it still makes you simply repeat and repeat, which is precisely what I am fundamentally against in Mathematics. I felt like throwing the thing to the floor and watch it blow a few times when I noticed how many hours I had already dedicated to that heinous activity. I then did a very similar thing: I first scrambled it again to worst, then I tossed it in a bag and dumped all in a trash bin as the most demoniac thing ever seen on earth. I finally got these people, with at least one procedure that I think may work (the two moves one), and I then decided to leave it here for you to tell us whether it does work or not: Cube I sincerely think there must be something very wrong with this Rubik guy. I reckon someone will do research and find out that the own guy was kinda demoniac. Another thing that put me to think was the fact that I also don't like Lego, don't see any fun in that. In common, they are both squarish things. In Brazil, when people are really really boring, we say that they are squarish. I suppose there is something to do with that, like all connects to form a single mass of certainty: Squarish is not good for games or entertainment. It is also associated with deep loneliness, to be sincere. 






Thursday, 20 April 2017

Thursday, 6 April 2017

Cross Multiply






Joke brings one interesting joke, only one: What do you get if you cross a climber with a mosquito? The answer is: Nothing, since you cannot cross-multiply a scaler by a vector...