How to Better Understand the Rubik's Cube

In today's puzzle video, I outline a method for simplifying your thinking about the Rubik's Cube toy, and intuitively understanding how to make new sets of moves. It's the longest video I've ever made, but if you can understand it, you can solve almost every twisty puzzle!
Kickstarter: www.kickstarte...
Rubik's Cube notation: ruwix.com/the-...
A hilarious NYTimes article about a Rubik's cube shootout: www.nytimes.com...
Twitter: / flebpuzzles
Email: [e-mail]
If you want to send me something, such as a puzzle you created or a letter, you can find my address below!
Address:
FLEB
P.O. Box 53109
Medford, MA 02153
I'm a Top-10 finisher in the US Puzzle Championship and just released a logic puzzle game on Steam! The game is called RYB: store.steampowe...
Intro song: Tekvision - Mycoplasma
Intro template: /SDJGRedstoneDJ

[@sirjohnnyg]

"In case you're blue-pink colorblind..." was the most thoughtful thing I've seen/heard from a youtube video in a while.

[@randomdude7842]

John Gallagher Wasn't that just a joke?

[@BlazingCigzLikeJays]

@@randomdude7842 nah he seems genuine

[@deepak2049]

but its wrong...it should have been either red green or blue green blind

[@owenlawlor7422]

If someone was color blind in the first place, why would they be solving a rubix cube?

[@Oransj3]

@@owenlawlor7422 Some color-blind people can still make out the color, they just have to focus more. Plus there are custom cubes that have graphics on them.

[@FLEBpuzzles]

Hope you are all doing well! Some links: Kickstarter: www.kickstarter.com/projects/fleb/escape-the-book Rubik's Cube notation: ruwix.com/the-rubiks-cube/notation/ A hilarious NYTimes article about a Rubik's cube shootout: www.nytimes.com/2006/05/14/magazine/14funny_humor.html Twitter: twitter.com/FLEBpuzzles Email: [e-mail]

[@Jonnyboy1270]

You are such an incredibly intelligent individual

[@EmeraldLavigne]

Yes, yes, yes oh my god, thank you - I'm so glad I found this video! I want to learn how **I** can solve it by like using my brain on it, rather than mechanically rote-learning a set of letters - where's the fun in that?!?

[@daimyenholl6413]

Y

[@BlazingCigzLikeJays]

@@daimyenholl6413 cause it's a puzzle, made more your brain

[@AnNguyenpilgrim]

yes, I have the same thinking. even my way to solve it can be longer, but it will be more interesting to solve it in my way!

[@XtanNiCk]

Exactly

[@MonsterTeegs]

Somehow every other puzzle video makes sense to me but something about the rubks cube just goes over my head.

[@FLEBpuzzles]

It's an interesting class of puzzles! Everything you can do to the puzzle is clear, but the trick is figuring out how to simplify your thinking. Is there anything from the video that I can help clarify?

[@MonsterTeegs]

FLEB No, you did a great job in the video. It has more to do with me not being able to visualize the moves and the outcomes on multiple faces, thanks though! I'm sure if I keep trying I'll start to make sense of it!

[@FLEBpuzzles]

Best of luck everyone!

[@pragatikhadye4241]

i was so stressed out these days n i randomly felt like playing with this ...yess it stressed me out more than anything else😂😂... But indeed it's something that made me sit back n put my mind in this one thing ..felt like a 'ME TIME' 😌..i think it actually boosted my concentration level.. also I'm not giving up till i solve it!!🔫🔥🔥🔥

[@mrittwikaduttagupta2835]

okay this channel/person is officially the sweetest guy I know

[@joelwerner7075]

Seriously blew my mind when you moved the sticky note for the first time at 4:28. It all made sense, then. Great video, Fleb.

[@FLEBpuzzles]

I'm glad to hear that Joel! Thank you for watching!

[@haddock6324]

This has made me see the Rubik's Cube in a new light. I'm used to just following algorithms without understanding why. This video will, without a doubt, help me to complete the cube faster and make solving it more beneficial for my mind. Thank you.

[@intillex1]

I always thought Fleb was just disembodied hands and a voice!

[@onometre]

no that's ashens

[@Sathtana]

Now you know he is a whole body of crazy virgin.

[@onometre]

He has a wife and kid

[@renaton1215]

Zachary Latham Hahahahah came here to make the exactly same commentary!! 😁

[@raywalsh4382]

Fleb is a cosmic energy using a human host

[@thomasdickson35]

I came to this channel because I was informed that using acetone and tweezers to orient the adhesive color-coded labels was not, in fact, the goal. Thank you!

[@starmanatee]

This blew my mind. I never thought about reversing the moves but on a different piece.

[@randomlyrebecca403]

I am so happy I found your video. When I got my cube I followed instructions then memorized them allowing me to finish the cube anytime. Weirdly though, I didn't feel completely satisfied as much as I expected. After many cube solves I realized, I all I knew were the steps I memorized i order.. I had no idea why they were what they were. If I messed at any pointup I'd have to restart from the very beginning every time I needed to underdstand. I knew there were a lot of videos on solving by instructions and so I expected it to be a tricky search. I found your video first and it was so awesome. I've watched it a dozen times and am about to test it out. Thank you so much!!

[@caveymon]

This video, combined with Jeff Varasano’s explanation of the cube (which details exactly the same methodology) helps me understand the cube a little bit better! And the signoff is such a no-brainer, that I’m grateful for you to make, as I need to take those notes because I keep forgetting the moves I did. (Bit of a weird sentence construction, but I mean it as a little jest, because I totally did not think of it myself to take notes of the moves I make).

[@jennyl9175]

"Cube notation" this is wild. Also you look exactly how I imagined you to, which is also wild. I'm such a fan.

[@FLEBpuzzles]

Thank you!

[@randyrobertson4686]

Just take the stickers off and reposition them in the proper orientation. Lol…I’m kidding. I think I successfully garnered a proper cube once or twice in my life. However I never really was around anyone who was reveled in the mastery of solving such problems. I am now intrigued and have the urge to buy a Rubik’s cube and solve it again….some 30 odd years give or take since the last time I even seen one. Great video by the way.

[@seancaddell8500]

By far the best video I have seen to help you understand how to solve the cube without the need to learn algorithms, just make up your own. thank you!

[@cos0]

"R prime" *flashbacks of calculus ensue*

[@hawxchampion523]

I would've thought F prime would've reminded you more

[@cos0]

Hawxchampion True, very true. I might be thinking of Physics? Isn't r(t) something? Position?

[@hawxchampion523]

I'm honestly not sure, good question! Haven't taken physics in over a year.

[@fatch3353]

Jack Stortroen I think s(t) is usually position, though r is usury used fior functions in a polar coordinate system if I remember correctly

[@cos0]

fatch3353 Yeah, you're right. Completely forgot about polar coordinates.

[@cuc9605]

Part 1/2 I like this video a lot, since I am showing how to solve the cube intuitively at a regular basis. In fact, it cost me about a year before I realized that only an intuitive method will make sense to most people who start trying to solve the cube. So, I appreciate your efforts, FLEB. This response has two functions: to serve as feedback to you AND to clarify your solutions to viewers. I realize how difficult it is to get all things lined up correctly and to define and use terms consistently in a video. But I found a lot of things I would like to change. Here goes. I hope everybody gets some value out of this. My comment consists of two parts, as they were too long :-). -- Now, I would suggest to streamline some of your algs a bit. They are not very easy to follow. In fact, there are more intuitive algs. But before I get into details, the most important thing to change is the terminology you use. It is best to use different words for "switching" and use those terms consistently; also to define them succinctly with an example. Terms to use: - move (turn a layer) - corner (has 3 facelets) - edge (has 2 facelets) - center (has 1 facelet) - piece (for corner, edge or center) - facelet (a side of a piece) - face (a side of the cube, having 9 facelets) - layer (the 9 pieces that share a side) - twist (rotate a corner in its place, orient a corner) - flip (rotate an edge in its place, orient an edge) - orient (for twisting and flipping only) - orientation (two for edges, three for corners) - position (for moving edges and corners to a different position in the cube) - solve (to correctly orient and position) - cycle (for positioning edges and corners in a cycle) - rotate (for turning the whole cube in a different orientation without turning layers) - swap (for the pairwise positioning of edges or corners) - monoswap (basically a swap, but emphasizing that it's just one swap instead of the two that are needed) It seems you use the word "switch" for orienting (of edges) and positioning (of edges and corners). This is confusing. - At first, around 1:40, you talk correctly about orienting the pieces and flipping a piece "around", but then you say 1:45-1:49: "so that the green is facing up to the layer it is supposed to be." I would say: "flip the edge, so that the green facelet is facing up and sits in the face of the green center". This reminds me that it is important to clarify that the centers do not move relative to each other, and therefore define the color of the face they are in. -- 2:40-2:50 An essential mistake was: "to reverse these moves, we have to do them in the opposite order". For beginners, this is really an essential insight. But it is not correctly formulated here. I would call it: to "undo" the moves, you need to reverse the order of the moves AND at the same time invert them, i.e., to reverse the rotational direction of each move. So, if we were to reverse R U U, then it is NOT correct to do them in the opposite order, because that would be U U R. We also have to invert them, so that gives U' U' R'. It would help to say that if you end with a U, that to undo it, you would do U'. So, to undo R U U, you would start with U', leaving R U to be reversed; and that would require another U', leaving R to be reversed; and that would require R'. Hence, you arrive at U' U' R'. The formula was correct, but it's important to be complete and correct in these matters. -- 3:30 Flipping the edge. You use R' E' R R E' E' R'. I would prefer this formula (R' E' R) (R E E R'), because now the piece UR you are moving is never leaving your sight. The video at this point has the cube incomplete in vision, and the edge is literally out of sight (out of the screen), when it is put in place. Of course, E' E' does the same as E E, except that it takes the edge out of sight. In both cases, beginners may not get at once that the edge UR will end up at RB before the last R'. It helps to point this out. 4:17 In your subsequent explanation, you make a good point about what could be done to solve the bottom layers. But then you say that "this piece also will get switched" about the flipped edge. Earlier, you correctly introduced the flip by saying that the "edge piece" is going to be "flipped". So, here you use "switch" for flipping. 4:44 Also, the term "original position", is somewhat inaccurated. Yes, the pieces DO go back to their original position, but they ALSO go back to their original orientation. I would call this that pieces get "restored", i.e., they go back to both their originall position AND original orientation. In fact, since you started with SOLVED bottom layers, they go back to SOLVED (because that was their original position and orientation). 5:30 "whatever position we want to switch is on the right". We do not want to switch a position. What does that even mean? So, you probably want to say: "we want to flip the EDGE in that [pointed to] positon [UR]". - 6:06 "without the other blue stickers in the top". I totally missed it at first that you meant the blue sticky notes. I use "stickers" for the stickers belonging to the facelets of the cube. You meant to say that you did not mark the other corners with a sticker. I would also mention that none of the other corners are oriented correctly. I also find it confusing to mark the corner with the sticker on its TOP. It was not as clear to me how to compare it to the edges; it wasn't clear what was going to happen to the sticker in advance. Instead, when the corner is oriented at the end of the formula, the sticker sits on one of its sides, but the attention shifts to the top, that shows the green facelet sticker. I did not notice where the green sticker started out from, and I had to rewind the video to find out. You did not indicate you were going to twist this corner COUNTERCLOCKWISE. Therefore, there wasn't a good transition to the next corner that is going to be oriented, but now twisted CLOCKWISE. Unfortunately, in the video the sticker of the second corner fell off at the end of the orientation alg. But it wasn't that important, as the second corner turned out to be correctly oriented, easily verified by looking at the top facelet. So, for this part of the explanation, the stickers you used were not so useful or even confusing. You could just as well have asked the viewer to look at the green facelet of the corners you were going to twist and show them in what direction (clockwise or counterclockwise) the corner was going to twist. You could also have emphasized that the corner piece was going to move to the bottom and back. Afterwards (6:35-39 and 7:24-), you suggested it in the summary (saying "moved it out of the top layer and back" and "taking it out of place and putting it back") but it is hard to follow this AFTER you did it. -- Twisting corners. Formula R' D' R D R' D' R. I would prefer to write (R' D' R) D (R' D' R) and to note that (R' D' R) is a short sequence that puts a corner from the top in the bottom; the next D move places it back under its original position, and then the same (R' D' R) puts it back in the top. So, the whole idea is to take the corner out, put it in the bottom and then put it back again. As a result it is twisted counterclockwise. The reverse will twist a corner clockwise. I call this a SIMPLE monotwist as it scrambles the bottom two layers.

[@jaredmeit6127]

This is brilliant. Thank you.

[@FLEBpuzzles]

Thank you very much!

[@rongriffith625]

I recently learned how to solve the 3x3 cube, so this is awesome to watch.

[@FLEBpuzzles]

That's awesome! I hope it makes sense!

[@daviddavidson9867]

Thank you for posting this! I recently got a 3x3 after not touching one for years, and after remembering the muscle memory to just mindlessly solve it I want to actually tackle other cubes thoughtfully instead of just memorizing the moves.

[@CoffeeCupLuv]

i think I'm just more confused than before..... top notch vid, I just don't think the cube is gonna be my party trick anytime soon

[@ralu9433]

This is a genius explanation because despite knowing how to do this for ages, this is the first time its ever made sense to me. Also I love how your descriptions of your moves are all like REEEEEREEEREE HURDRRRDRR ROGER FEDERER haha

[@dznr1618]

Sequence : Modify : Sequence_Reversed is a big idea. Thanks for that.

[@OtherSarrah]

Wow, I have been solving the this for years and never knew any of this! Fascinating! Thank you :)

[@FLEBpuzzles]

I'm glad to hear that you liked it!

[@riccello]

I was looking to gain more understanding of cause and effect for each move in a sequence, with respect to other pieces. A step by step discussion of the effect of last move, the problem that arises at every step, and the reasoning behind each consecutive move... At first, it sounded like that’s what you were going to talk about, but then it was a bit disappointing to see that you used entire sequences. I agree, the switch and reverse tactic is an exciting revelation for most, as it is not readily obvious, but it doesn’t really demystify the theory, and it doesn’t give you ways to think about the solution. Nice quality and effort though. Stickers are a great idea!

[@sknurislam2597]

Yes I'm also. Bro if u find any kind of 'your explained' type of vdo plz rply in the comment. Appreciate your thought

[@AussieDad79]

Agree totally!

[@HyperFuze]

My personal best is 14 seconds. People sometimes ask how and that it's too difficult. Once you do it long enough it all comes together and it makes sense.

[@rainverrev2307]

Hyper Fuze I don't find solving the rubik's cube too hard. What I do find difficult is to memorise all the oll and pll algs. I have given up on trying to learn CFOP and I'm sticking with the beginner's method.

[@HyperFuze]

Rain Verrev trust me cfop is worth it. Once you practice f2l and get really good at it you will NEVER use beginners method again. I struggled with f2l but I practiced for hours a day. I still don't know oll and pll fully. Keep at it man.

[@pluuuuuss]

CFOP is the method that I use and I can only get an average of 29 seconds, my pb is 24 seconds. Seeing that you're sub 20, what do you recommend to get better times?

[@itsblack2321]

STOP TALKING ABOUT ALGORITHMS IN AN INTUITIVE VIDEO

[@HyperFuze]

Plus10Voltz get better at f2l mainly and learn more oll.

[@jake_a_g]

Thumbs up for the most jank cube of all time.

[@FLEBpuzzles]

Is it really that bad? :p

[@fromtheforest4413]

Yes

[@llloyd4]

I was thinking just that. Even my official Disney Rubik's moves and sounds better after a bit of sanding and oiling. O.o

[@amaljoers4181]

Damn! Its impressive to understand why each algos work

[@nsuinteger-au]

Great explanation. Was looking for content like this that doesn't require memorizing many algorithms like a parrot.

[@Grozdor]

nice vid Fleb! this is exactly what I was looking for! I can solve Rubik slowly but surely but I didn't get any understanding of it since I just look the formula on the internet.

[@FLEBpuzzles]

Thank you! I'm glad to hear that!

[@frankenstein974]

Someone on Reddit told me to solve the cube corners first. So I started doing that. Thing is, after I put two corners in the right place I just HAD to put the edge piece between those corners. It was like a compulsion. So I DID that. And I kept doing that, and before I knew it I had solved TWO faces withing a minute. I have solved a Rubik's cube without learning any solution, in fact I've solve a bunch of different 3x3 cubes, not all of them Rubik's brands.

[@cuc9605]

Part 2/2 After 7:50 you talk about positioning the pieces. So, there shouldn't be a use of the word "switch". It was used to flip an edge (see above). You start by showing a simple edge monoswap. I don't understand the reference to "face moves", which seems to refer to how we flipped an edge. Perhaps what you mean is that you want to keep all the pieces in the top again, after finishing the mononswap? The formula you use for the edge monoswap seems a bit complicated. It consists of two parts that at first weren't very logical to me. The first part is R' E R D' F' E' F and second part is R' E E R. The D and F moves in the first part confused me, until I followed the piece from its origin (UR) to its goal position (UF). We can all see the effect of the first part is that the edge at UR moves to UF, and that the effect of the second part is to move the edge that was at UF and now at LB back to UR. Still, I would use this simple edge monoswap instead: (R' E' R) U' (R' E R) U to move UR to UF, followed by (R' E' R) to move RD to UR. In this approach, you always use the UR position to move a piece in or out of the top layer and in or out of the equator layer at the same time. There is no need to use D or F moves or even to use E2 moves. 9:20-22 "Any reversal of moves will switch these two pieces". You use the word "switch" here again. But nothing gets flipped. You mean: "The reversal of moves will SWAP these two EDGES." I like to call the pieces by their names if it isn't a general statement about any pieces. 9:23-28 Then you continue by saying: "luckily, we need to switch these two pieces to get a consistent orientation." This is VERY confusing, considering the previous. What you meant to say is this: "luckily, we need to SWAP these two edges to SOLVE them." You use only ONE sticker by now, while you are swapping TWO edges. It's not very helpful or clear what the function of that sticker is by now. You use the formula R' E' E' R F' E F D R' E' R, which is the correct reversal, but I got a bit lost in its effect. In my reverse, it becomes (R' E R) U' (R' E' R) U'--note that this is the same formula I used before, just inverting the E moves--followed by R' E R. 9:59 "These pieces have switched", you mean SWAPPED. Then you say at 10:07 "this oriented all the edge pieces on the top face." Again, this is confusing, because all the edge pieces were ALREADY oriented correctly before we started positioning them. You meant to say that "all the edge pieces in the top LAYER are POSITIONED correctly, and now SOLVED." 10:06-14 You keep talking once more about orienting pieces, while you mean that you were POSITIONING EDGES (without changing the orientation). 10:30-35 You ask the viewer if they wondered why the algs they can look up "use two pieces for ORIENTATION and three pieces for POSITION", and now you distinguish between these two different kind of "switches". You left out two cases where you DO need two edge swaps; X-perm and Z-perm. The 3-cycles for positioning exist as a combination of two swaps. If we have three pieces X Y Z, and swap the first two, we get Y X Z and if we then swap the last two, we get Y Z X. Comparing the start and the finish of the two swaps we see that X Y Z went to Y Z X, which is effectively a 3-cycle: Y -> X -> Z -> Y. 10:36 "we can only do cycles of three". That is not true. You also did not give a simple CORNER monoswap. The formula I would use is: (R' D' R) U' (R' D R) U followed by (R' D' R), and its inverse (R' D R) U' (R' D' R) U followed by (R' D R). Note that the inverse is just the original but with all D /D' moves replaced by their inverse. At the same time in the video you rotate the cube 180 degrees, but it is clear that ALL FOUR corners are not in their correct position, because even though they are oriented correctly with the green facelet on top, there isn't a single one that matches any of its other colors to the sides it touches. In fact, at 10:40, the front corner (green-white-red) needs to swap with its right neighbor, and the other two corners ALSO need to swap. Of course, you are not going to do two 3-cycles; this is just a double swap. Another possibility is that the swaps occur for pieces on the diagonal (as an X). You can use a simple corner monoswap similar the earlier mentioned, just use a different intermediate U-move between the (R, D)-parts. Thus (R' D' R) U2 (R' D R) U2 followed by (R' D' R), then move U and then use its inverse two swap the other diagonal. Another simple corner monoswap that is very easy AND is ITS OWN INVERSE (i.e., if you perform it twice, it will do nothing), is the following: (R' D' R) (L D L') (R' D' R). Note how the corners URF and UFL get swapped. On a solved cube you can see that the resulting pattern has a left-right symmetry, and is thus its own inverse. This one does not involve the intermediate U-moves, but you need one U-move before you apply it again to swap another pair of corners. -- It's a good advice to write down your moves. In fact, any moves you do to try and achieve a result will likely give you a USEFUL algorithm. Anybody will be able to find their own simple edge monoflip, simple corner monotwist, simple edge monswap and simple corner monoswap. -- I hope this review and feedback will help everybody.

[@PawDieFur]

now, you probably know this but, being a puzzler (twisty puzzle) i understand this. however the "algorithms" can be explained in the same way. it fully depends on your instructure on if they feel the need to explain it in depth. ex: t-perm this algorithm swaps the top 2 right corners (bottom right and top right) and the 2 top edges on the left and right while keeping its original orientation. the move is very long, but here it is: ( R U R' U') (R' F) (R2 U') (R' U' R U) (R' F'). now, each "( )" is a different section of which is happening in the algorithm. the first 4 are setup moves, moving peices arond the cube so that the rest can be moved specifically. the next 2 are moving 2 pieces, a corner and an edge, from the original bottom layer out of the way so they dont get messed up. the next 2 are doing the same as the last two. moving 2 pieces, a corner and an edge, out of the way so the moves dont mess it up. the next 4 do the rest of the work, moving the specific pieces around while doing half of the moves for the de-setup moves. the last 2 moves undo the setup moves from the begining of the algorithm

[@thrillscience]

You're worried about blue-pink color blindness, but if you're color-blind, then the cube is always solved! Thanks for another great video. (It sound like your cube can use some lube!)

[@SoNextJenn]

thrillscience That is actually offensive.

[@thrillscience]

Meh!

[@gnarsloggethesloth3085]

hahaha funny joke you're so original it doesn't even make sense either. Even color blind people can make out a few different shades and would realize the puzzle wasn't solved.

[@tabaks]

Jayrfinite your struggle is all too real. However, just because you fail to find a more direct way to pick a fight, that doesn't mean finding something offensive is the answer. Your life must be hell, what with the rest of the humanity trying to offend you all the time.

[@HauskaHrafn]

Jayrfinite how is this offensive in any way And don't pull the "its offensive to colorblind people" card, because I'm colorblind

[@SpicyFPV]

It seems like this is more an enhancement to the "memorize some algorithms" method rather than actually teaching a person how to create their own. This video wouldn't take a person from not knowing how to solve a cube into solving one, or even remotely close. It will however help a person who already knows how to solve one using someone else's algorithms, how to better understand the moves they are executing. Case and point, whenever I teach people how to solve cubes, I purposely do not teach them any moves for solving the first layer. After they have learned on their own how to do that, I teach them all of the misc algorithms for solving layers 2 and 3. The reason is because in many cases, just like you showed in this video, that knowing the methodology of moving a cube where you want it as if it was in the first layer, is utilized on the subsequent layers with additional prime/reverse moves to reset the cube. However without knowing how to solve that first layer, pretty much any other instructions, tutorials, tips/tricks are basically useless.

[@MrEDMeaner]

I'd agree with this. A year ago I couldn't solve a single face on a 3x3, I tried and tried and eventually got it (after realising that each piece has a specific place), then got better at it. I had to learn rote algorithms to solve the second and third layers and finally have some grasp on these, but it's still rote. I watched this hoping to be enlightened on how to approach a cube beyond algorithms but sadly don't feel like I did. I guess what I have learned is that maybe I could experiment with some move a piece, switch and reverse it, but I don't think it will take me further towards understanding how I could solve it myself. An interesting video for sure, and maybe I am just slow, but I feel none the wiser...

[@markangeloflores9180]

I agree with your comment. You can't considered a "puzzle" of your own if you look it up easily without trying it. Solving a puzzle takes a lots of practice and patience 😉 👍 😃

[@pokestep]

"And the same techniques can be applied to other twisty puzzles" is a sentence I sorta hate in thede kinda "tutorials". This is a great explanation but unfortunately, you can't solve higher order cubes (4x4, 5x5) using ONLY these types of moves. Yes, they come in handy (since higher orders are basically just a 3x3 anyway), but unfortunately, they are useless when it comes to parities. A very nicely done explanation though!

[@pokestep]

(Also, algorithms you commonly find online are optimized. This shows why you can only orient 2 and reposition 3 process at the time, but algorithms are not always obvious in how they came around because they don't do it the simple way you showed.)

[@FLEBpuzzles]

That's a good point! This has a specific setup, which means it only works on situations when you can set it up like this. But it does get you a lot of the way on most twisty puzzles! I'm glad you liked the explanation!

[@pokestep]

FLEB I mean yes, you can almost solve any cube using these algorithms (even though I'm not sure how applicable they are for centers/edges on a 4x4 and higher cubes). It's just that these "tricks" (i.e. explanation of why this works, compared to just blind usage of algorithms) is usually baked the "ultimate way to solve all cubes", which it obviously isn't. That aside, which cubes/twisty puzzled can you save, FLEB, and which one is your favorite?

[@cosmicjenny4508]

+pokestep Unfortunately, higher order cubes need just intuitive moving to make the centres, and maybe a 'system' for tracking the edge making. On a 4x4, for example, I make 2, 2x1 blocks to make the centres, and leave all but 3 edges solved to solve them all at the same time. Unfortunately, parity is just something you _want_ to just learn off by heart, to save yourself the grief, but it's only a max of two algorithms, so you'll pick it up quickly enough. Tony Fisher does a good video on how he cracked the 4x4 edge parity all of those years ago! It's a good watch, to be honest.

[@pokestep]

Evan Blenkinsopp Yeah I'm aware, I figured it 4x4 (besides parities) myself and it's very similar on 5x5. As you said, they both have 2 parities (with one algorithm being very very similar), but my point still stands - that you can't solve the entire cube using just the type of moves shown in the video. Obviously it's easier to learn the moves by heart in this case, but some of the algorithms are p long. And I'm not even talking about things like SQ1.

[@mcarper826]

loving that boardgame shelf! Forbidden Desert is fanstastic. Cosmic Encounter is probably my absolute favorite

[@FLEBpuzzles]

Cosmic Encounter is great! My favorite is Mansions of Madness! I adore Dimension. And I haven't gotten a chance to play T.I.M.E. Stories yet, but I hope to do so soon!

[@juliawhitmore3991]

Fleb is so pure.

[@SpeedCubeProRL]

And this is basically the concept of 3 style in it's entirety.

[@yahir7ev]

I am so glad I found this channel

[@kohlrak]

I think you figured out the fundamental issue that people have with these puzzles, which is the first and most important step to the solution. However you went from beginner to expert without stepping anywhere in between. The problem i have is that rather than understanding the cube and the problems, i have to look up what these terms and notation mean and actually do them to properly follow along. Perhaps demonstrations requiring minimal amounts of moves to illustrate your point would be easier. If i'm understanding this correctly, it would be easier to follow with some sort of computer simulation that were capable of showing the cube at all angles, while also being able to specially color the squares that you're disregarding. Moreover, explaining why you are able to disregrd them would be useful as well.

[@ComatoseCutiee]

Flex is so adoraaaaaabbblllleeeee

[@Robertlavigne1]

Very nice! I like the explanation of conjugates and commutators using sticky notes. It makes the visualization so much cleaner! Also please buy yourself a proper speed cube. Those turns look so painful!! Even if you don't care about speed it is sooo much more enjoyable to solve on a smooth non-locking cube.

[@FLEBpuzzles]

I had no idea people would literally be in pain from my cube, or I would have gotten a smoother one! :p

[@3bgr]

Fleb. You're a doll!! Thanks for your video.

[@mathdon1106]

To anyone who is interested in cubing, what he used common alg used to order each of the layers. He just did it them in an awkward orientation If he really wanted you to understand the cube he would not have skipped the huge canyon that is the set of moves used to achieve the swap..

[@netneedingsystems2318]

Nice thanks for sharing fleb!

[@cosmicjenny4508]

Just film the video in black-and-white, no one will know the different! Haha. Great video, FLEB!

[@Spoif]

This seems to prove how the known solutions solve aspects of the cube. It doesn't help understanding of the cube nor does it help optimise moves.

[@x9x9x9x9x9]

A 10+ min fleb video!? Hell yes!

[@FLEBpuzzles]

I hope you enjoyed it!

[@0ThrowawayAccount0]

This is seriously underrated. It is one of the best channels on KZbin! I just watched a guy do a Rubik's cube at 21:47 on a Saturday night.

[@boolboolbool6255]

Excellent video

[@vaibhavpatel8628]

great explanation!!

[@olarmariusalex]

Pure gold!

[@BillTheThrill]

I am literally 1:12 in and I’m already stoked

[@JimSolvesEverything]

Interesting way to look at it. Thanks for sharing! :)

[@ianweis3108]

Is that a Shengshou Sujie cube? Mine turned stiffly like that for a long time and never seemed to break in much, but some lube instantly improved the quality. All of your videos thus far have been very fascinating. Thanks very much.

[@FLEBpuzzles]

I have no idea what cube it is! I bought it several years ago!

[@CarstenSvendsen]

I knew how to solve a rubiks cube and a 4x4 but I had no idea about what happened. This helped me understand it a lot better

[@FLEBpuzzles]

I'm glad to hear that Carsten!

[@andrewjohnson7265]

Pretty stacked board game shelf.

[@SomeRandomFellow]

this is a pretty interesting variation of commutaters. very enlightening!

[@FLEBpuzzles]

I'm glad you liked it! My goal was to not talk about mathematics at all, but still explain it.

[@SomeRandomFellow]

FLEB well commutaters (in a cubing sense) actually have nothing to do with mathematics, they are just a way to swap two pieces by scrambling the rest of the cube as minimally as possible. they are more useful on larger cubes (5x5, 6x6, etc.), because they have pieces that look the exact same as others so they can be scrambled amongst each other without making a difference (if that makes any sense). what youre doing is pretty similar to this

[@kirawolf98]

I feel exceedingly ignorant in not yet being able to grasp how to do this, so thank you very much for this well paced tutorial 👏🏼 helps so much

[@Susanne-r1g]

THANKS! Still dificult, but I would really like to go from solving to understanding!

[@Bzlatar]

Thanks so much for this man

[@suem4914]

Fleb is my hero 😂

[@catnipyfy]

Really informative - many thanks! :)

[@taylorvanness1860]

I love all your videos, your awesome!!!!!

[@FLEBpuzzles]

Thank you!

[@markangeloflores9180]

Sir I'm skeptic and love abstract concepts and theories on solving puzzles on my own. It's very cool, exciting, surprising once you are the one who figure out the puzzle. It's a whole new level of Intuition, exercising other thinking skills. Thanks for the advice Sir 😁 ❣️ 👍 🍩☕ 🎱 😄

[@bug3848]

This video was really helpful thanks!😊 please keep up the great work!!👍🏻👍🏻

[@FLEBpuzzles]

I'm glad you enjoyed it!

[@Kinkajou1015]

I'd like if you did a series of videos on 2x2x2 up to 5x5x5 cubes, the megaminx (12 color), and pyraminx puzzles. That way you explain some for a simpler puzzle, more advanced puzzles, and everything in between. It might help people that didn't quite understand this one since the 2x2x2 puzzle can be thought of as just the corners of a 3x3x3 but some people need to see it and can't just wrap their heads around it. Also if you do go with this, I implore get puzzles that turn smoother and possibly stickerless.

[@FLEBpuzzles]

I could do the 2x2x2. I'd like to understand parity on a more intuitive level before I cover the 4x4x4, though!

[@Kinkajou1015]

FLEB Completely understandable that you would want a better intuitive understanding before doing the larger puzzles.

[@bg6b7bft]

Your gaming shelf looks a lot like mine. Cool beans! FYI if you like Fantasy Flight's Cthulhu based games, the card game version they're doing now has really improved the play-ability. It's more streamlined and story based than the board games, and plays faster. (It's also harder to find because their prints runs are too small.)

[@FLEBpuzzles]

I'm hoping to check that out at GenCon this year! We'll see!

[@danaondrackova3431]

I like how you talk about it, it is jsut too hard for me to follow your steps since I not only think about the sollution but I also has to translate your language into mine in my head so I know what are you talking about and it is really hard to do both things at once :D also why do you have TWO the same board games (Mansion of Madness I guess?)

[@FLEBpuzzles]

Those are expansions of the 2nd edition of Mansions of Madness!

[@danaondrackova3431]

Oh ok thanks :-) I never played those but seeing so many of the games behind you I want to try some of them :D

[@matthewbrown7166]

This video gained you a follow. 👊

[@WesleyBakewell]

amazing stuff man, thanks

[@FLEBpuzzles]

I'm glad you enjoyed it!

[@iminlalaland4ever]

This video was a little bit confusing for me, but I think it might be because I'm not very familiar with the Rubix cube. Do you think you might do a Rubix cube solve video?

[@FLEBpuzzles]

I think you have to be familiar with the Rubik's cube to understand it. I could do a Rubik's solve video!

[@ErikErosa]

This is the One video on rubik's to rule them all. For the first time ever since I've owned a cube I solved it understanding it. oh I've solved it before, but I always hated the memorize instructions approach since I feel it takes the fun away from the puzzle

[@Sir.YeetusIII]

Yoooo this is sooooo cool!!!!

[@hectormayoral443]

WEEEEEE i squealed when you said lets get started

[@hscarvalho10]

Really good thanks

[@jahjahraf]

hell yeah! you look just as I imagined you. you're the man love your videos and soothing voice ;) Mr Rogers of the future

[@FLEBpuzzles]

Thank you! My wife loved that description and now she's talking about knitting me a cardigan sweater! :p

[@charlescannon2469]

Me: I can solve up until last layer and then I'm lost. FLEB: I'm starting with the last layer *visible excitment*

[@maze121]

You look like how I imagined you. Keep up the good work!

[@FLEBpuzzles]

Thanks!

[@spacevspitch4028]

Another thing I've noticed about the Rubik's cube is that...I managed to get to the last corners intuitively without realizing the principle that you outline here. Which is probably why I ultimately got stuck there. I couldn't intuitively figure out the commutator principle to orient the corners in a cycle. BUT...I routinely run into people that can't even solve a single side intuitively. And I remember doing that first layer intuitively fairly easily but it was a bit inefficient and jumbled at first of course. But I don't know what to tell those people who can't even figure out how to follow and line up the pieces of a single layer. They tend to not have the patience to listen to me try to explain it anyway.

[@skepticalfrog]

I know some of these people. Actually, with patience, it works eventually. I successfully taught how to resolve a cube to two people who couldn't resolve the first layer at first.

[@melissalesbines7309]

Did your puzzle book get printed? I'd love to buy it!

[@bivamishra4044]

Please make more videos on twisty puzzles

[@FLEBpuzzles]

I want to cover all aspects of puzzles! I'm hoping I can cover more twisty puzzles.

[@OSheaPunk]

Watching this in 2024 and came to the comment section because of your "in case you are blue-pink colorblind" comment. That was so sweet and thoughtful :) Your video was very helpful and well done!

[@FatPointScheme]

The books on your shelf tell us a lot about you. I see some advanced math books, such as Munkre's Topology (2nd ed), Functional Analysis, QED, Fourier Analysis, Information Theory, and various physics books. In all likelihood you have a graduate level degree in physics or applied mathematics, and may be an academic to this day. I have only one question. What is your opinion of the board game Puerto Rico?

[@FLEBpuzzles]

I've never played it! I don't really like Eurogames.

[@40sUphillBothWays]

If ever there were an origin to the proliferation of submitting false data in studies, all you Rubik's Cube creators are middle and high school--You're all a strong contender. When you have a solve that doesn't work for your method, it's slight of hand. ~ 09:30 ish

[@wesout4784]

I still have no idea how to solve a Rubik's cube after watching this. Really enjoyed the video though :)

[@MediumAmoeba96]

But how would one come up with those move sequences?

[@iphone4wsom3]

This is a legitimately good and interesting video. My only criticism is concerned with the notations you provide. Instead of saying or displaying r u u, say r u2. The way you do it now could make it confusing, especially for beginners.

[@nibeditasarkar4452]

Please give one video on mirror cubes.

[@christopherchadwick6484]

Got a bit lucky but I've solved it for the first time ever without looking up the solution. Thanks!

[@l.fsader6021]

There is no solution. It is a choice of patterns that are in certain sequences that are non specific to the beginning or ending of the cubes initial position

[@exert2020]

wow. This was really handy.

[@darksideofthemood]

I recognize the talent and the effort put in this video. I admire everything on this channel. But damn am i too stupid to understand anything

[@bucketstuck7137]

Nah, you’re not; simply put, follow where a random piece moves throughout using the most obvious changes, and then from there you’ll be able to reverse-map its paths. Now, I’m *definitely* too stupid for this shit, but I can at least keep track in order to get a stronger overall understanding as to its limitations.

[@vaverdugo2]

Cool vid, Fleb. But how do the people who have a record in quickness to solve the cube do it? They surely don't use this method, do they? Thanks.

[@FLEBpuzzles]

Nope! There are all sorts of optimized finger tricks and moves to solve it. Really, that doesn't interest me as much as understanding the puzzle and coming up with techniques to solve it, but if you're interested, the KZbin channels CrazyBadCuber, JRCuber, and RedKB (and a bunch of others) talk more about that!

[@bhavneetsingh4784]

Thank you.

[@ResidentOfTheAbyss]

Hey Fleb! I've seen videos here on You Tube, of where people turn the top portion then, turn a side in just two alternating motions until solved. It's obviously the easy way out, but it looks like it works, maybe you could try it, to put that theory to the test?

[@FLEBpuzzles]

If you're only turning two sides, you can't solve all configurations of the cube. Just turning two sides doesn't affect all the pieces.

[@Easasera]

Thank you! I think I finally got it!

[@FLEBpuzzles]

Woohoo!

[@cesareborgia9259]

Are the moves for the first layer available? You’re not just doing any moves, right? There are specific moves to move A to B, say, such that these properties hold. I tried doing it on my own, and the top layer was affected.

[@josenari.c4880]

How do I know which pieces to switch with and like how do I solve without having to follow a specific order like on KZbin

[@zulou2315]

Nice to see you :)

[@FLEBpuzzles]

Nice to see you too!