Only Three parts but impossible!? - The Three Cubes

[@TheAgamemnon911]

With pieces that are identical, the solution is usually some kind of symmetry. As soon as one realises that, its suddenly a lot easier.

[@thatoneginger]

Yeah, I think you just got stuck on thinking they should “nest” on the concave side. There’s some interesting psychology going on there.

[@tinwhiskerSC]

Yup, I recognized that right away as I've seen a similar puzzle before. So many puzzles have pieces that have pieces that "face inside" and the interlocks meet on interior corners of the pieces. I think this plays on that because you actually fit the "outside" pieces of the puzzle against each other.

[@Mr.Puzzle]

Definitely!

[@Novaximus]

Yeah I saw that too. I didn't know the solution because I don't have the puzzle in front of me but I kept thinking...."when is mr puzzle going to try putting these pieces back to back instead of "nestled" It reminds me of that flat 2D puzzle where you have to make the letter "T" out of 5 pieces. One of the pieces looks so distinguished with a 90 degree angle that you swear it should go at the top of the T but that was too fool you.

[@SpiderSparta56]

@@Mr.Puzzle you are Awesome and I love watching you and Chris Ramsey. Thanks for your time showing us awesome Puzzles

[@MoTab78]

You struggled because you were trying to make cubes only with the inward sides. Another way of saying it is that you didn't "think outside the box" :)

[@fewwiggle]

Shouldn't the admonition be: You didn't think "inside" the box ??? :-)

[@Ogsonofgroo]

What awesome little puzzle! Thank you Mr. Puzzle for your postings, I am not a puzzler but for some strange reason I have a fascination for how they come apart and how you guys figure things out, some of the complex ones are quite amazing to me, just not how they are done, but also their construction/engineering and beauty. Cheers from Canada PNW!

[@skyscraperfan]

When I saw the three pieces, I was quite sure that the would be a "trisymmetric" solution. It was clear that A) each piece was part of exactly two cubes and B) two pieces could not be part of the same two cubes. Otherwise those cubes would already be "full" and the thirs piece could only be part of the third cube, which contradicts A). Those thought makes most of the possible solutions impossible, because each cube has to touch each other cube at at least a 0.5 times length x 0.5 times length square, where the pieces are glued together.

[@Mr.Puzzle]

😊👌

[@Croftice1]

All the pieces are not only identical, they are also symetric with opposite polarities. If you want a shape from two pieces that don't initially stick together, just turn one of the pieces 180° around axis X, then 180° around axis Y, you'll get the exact same shape with polarities, that attract.

[@groowanderer]

Love it. Different puzzles are difficult to different people. It has always been this way. Mr Puzzle is no exception :)

[@Dreadzilla]

Yes! I love “live” solves! Not so much when it’s done on KZbin Live, but I like this format where you film solving a puzzle for the first time!

[@XiphosCreates]

I think the list of "possible arrangements" you made at the start might have made it more difficult for you to see other solutions like the end result

[@pyr4mid3]

yes and the last one he drew was impossible

[@RubberyCat]

Not necessarily, it was just that he did not draw ALL possible combinations.

[@Mr.Puzzle]

Absolutely!

[@DomAZ]

So simple but give you some hard time. Nice puzzle, thank you to share with us.

[@artax3967]

When will you be solving the 3 sea shells?

[@Mr.Puzzle]

When the time has come!

[@rickyhall7514]

You were trying to connect each part together like a jigsaw puzzle, as anyone would do. Meanwhile the answer was to face the parts away from each other.

[@6n6rchst]

way to spoil the video for everyone dude

[@rickyhall7514]

@@6n6rchst My bad, I distain spoilers as well. Although, in these instances, do you really go to comments before watching a puzzle video???

[@caster269]

Kief Adam To be fair 95% of people don’t goto the comment section until after watching the video. The point of comments is to discuss the video after all.

[@UweKeim]

I am looking through the comments WHILE watching the video currently I am at 5:30

[@caster269]

Uwe Keim That’s fine to do but it still isn’t the norm. If someone’s worried about spoilers then they obviously shouldn’t be one of the ones who read comments during the video.

[@kozag-realityauditor7075]

after how bored you have sounded with recent puzzles, it was nice to hear that little 'what?' of pleasant surprise at success :)

[@staceykart2503]

Cool puzzle, I'm glad you're solving the puzzle in front of us instead of showing us the end result. Really enjoyable to watch you go through the process of figuring it out. This puzzle has a lot of charm.

[@creageous]

If it were only shaped like a giraffe.

[@robchandler755]

That is savage!

[@u.v.s.5583]

The giraffe puzzle is still the hardest one, it has only two freaking pieces and it is impossible!!!!

[@Ciaolo]

That would make it impossibler

[@gabydewilde]

3 pieces is way harder than 2. Difficulty seems to progress in a non-linear fashion. Call me utopian but I think humans might one day do a puzzle with 4.

[@u.v.s.5583]

@@gabydewilde It depends on the shape of the puzzle. In theory you can make a planar two piece puzzle arbitrarily complex, since the length of the boundary of every piece can be arbitrary large. Like you have to fint the two only parts of the boundaries that connect, you have to pick one of N possible portions from every piece, so the complexity is N^2, as N to infinity. Always only two pieces. The Giraffe is truly unfathomable.

[@nanobiggy]

I definitely find all the videos you make trying to solve a puzzle much more interesting than ones where you solve it beforehand, and just show us the solution. Please keep on doing those types of videos. Thanks!

[@joevitaebella]

I did purchase this beautiful puzzle!! It is so simple, and yet, so hard to figure out!! That's what makes this puzzle so clever and intriguing. Only 3 pieces, how hard can that be? Well, I have handed this out to many people, after first letting them actually see what it looks like when solved, for just a moment. Then I take it apart and hand it to them, and I have not yet had anyone solve it. ( In which none of them are puzzlers) but still :) My Wife who's pretty good at these, tried for about 22 minutes and gave up. My boss brought it home for a week and never solved it!! It is ingenious, and I love the magnets, and think that may throw things off a bit. I certainly is deceptive!! Love it!! As for me, I watched your solution :}

[@1NOTTOOOLD]

I enjoy watching your videos very much. I enjoy your humility when you find a puzzle difficult. I also enjoy your sense of humor and your ability to laugh at yourself.

[@der0hund]

This is one of the most stunning puzzles i've ever seen! Greetings from Vienna!

[@jesuschrist7508]

Amazing puzzle,so simple,yet so tricky.We need more of these!:)

[@HolyNickTheHobbit]

That reaction to solving it was great

[@SergeMatveenko]

The first thing to notice on paper is that after two pieces have been connected the third must connect free sides of both together. So, the solution must be circular.

[@mhelvens]

It helps to think about the relative positioning that the two unjoined magnets of a two-piece configuration should have in order to accommodate the third piece. That will reduce your search space. The two unjoined magnets of a single piece, when thought of as line segments, are on parallel planes a full cube length away from each other. So to accommodate the third piece, our two-piece configuration must exhibit that same property between *its* two unjoined magnets. That means the first two pieces must face away from each other, leaving only four configurations left to check.

[@Croftice1]

I'm not quite sure, because it was shown multiple times in the video, that each piece has opposite polarities. If you want a shape from two pieces, that repel, all you need to do for them to stick together, is turning one of them around twice (first around one axis, then around another axis), you'll get the exact same configuration now with opposite polarities, that attract. The magnets don't indicate any solution in fact.

[@ciary]

I don't own this puzzle, but while watching you fiddle I thought "He always tries to connect on the 'inside' faces of the piece. what if you connect all the outside faces instead?" turns out that was the right thought

[@CrimFerret]

I started to wonder when you showed some of the magnets repelling if they should actually go together with the other two faces even though that didn't seem intuitive. If it were just an interlocking puzzle, the magnets wouldn't really be needed, but they are to hold this together when the solution is found. Pretty neat puzzle.

[@IamFluffY90]

I don’t have this puzzle but I like to watch you solve and think about how I would approach it. I particularly like these puzzles that have a simple geometric solution. From the start I had a theory that they would each align on a different axis but I must admit I would’ve been stuck trying to put them together on the concave sides rather than the convex. Great solve Mr. Puzzle!

[@Mr.Puzzle]

Thanks!

[@queencarter3048]

This is still completely blowing my mind, I can't comprehend how this works by just seeing it no matter how many times I watch this video. This puzzle is ingenious!

[@stuartkcalvin]

Mate, it was interesting. My son-in-law loves your stuff when I send him your recommended puzzles. Thanks, stu

[@shykitten55]

Just as another question: Now knowing the solution, have you tried assembling it so the wood grain match? I would have used that as a starting point to see if the grains lined up when solved and used that to resolve how they fit together.

[@Mr.Puzzle]

Did not try it. I would wonder it they consider it. The manufacturing would be a nightmare. 😁

[@shykitten55]

@@Mr.Puzzle Well I only suggested it because somewhere in the time line they would have had 3 cubes. If they cut them in half and made the pieces randomly or cut them in half and kept their original positions when building the pieces. Who knows, but it was one way I would have looked at finding a solution.

[@fk6536]

Nice video, some mindgame this one.. Would love to see a video of your puzzle storage :)

[@england6317]

I love your channel puzzles are so interesting and mentally stimulating the challenge of working out how something works and how to solve it its just cool I have been watching for over a year

[@Mr.Puzzle]

Thanks! Great to hear you following on already that long!

[@EleanorPeterson]

That's a beautiful puzzle. I think a key part of its cleverness is the name; by using the word 'cube', most people attempting to solve it will place the pieces 'internally', creating an impossible box. Once the internal cube idea takes hold it's very hard to shift! Ironically, somebody with no preconceptions about boxes, cubes, or puzzle blocks would probably have a less difficult time with this. Let a puppy play with it, or give it to a 3 year-old child; I mean no disrespect, Mr Puzzle, but sometimes a great deal of knowledge can be a dangerous thing! :-)

[@Mr.Puzzle]

This is exactly what I will do! I'm also curious how long others will nerd. The ones I asked are all close to my time. Interesting!

[@nathancate582]

Im seeing a pattern of 3/5 ratings. Someone step up and send Mr Puzzle a 5/5 again! Lol

[@Mr.Puzzle]

😁

[@MaggotKing556]

5/5 is too easy send him a 6/5

[@nathancate582]

@@MaggotKing556 that would be like if you crossed Excalibur with the Giraffe. Excaliraffe.

[@pepperonipizza8200]

The Giraffe itself is already a 6/5. You need to have him create an entire herd.

[@notahotshot]

@@rg8766, the only way a puzzle can be impossible is if there is no solution. If there is no solution, it's not a puzzle, it's a paperweight. If you accept the fact that there are exactly zero "impossible" puzzles then you will be able to stop worrying about the word "impossible" being in the title.

[@J.Tronix]

Mr puzzle is the best, hes often imitated but can never be duplicated 💪💪💪

[@Mr.Puzzle]

😂👌

[@spacemansam3416]

Watching Mr. puzzle is like asmr for my brain

[@Mr.Puzzle]

😎

[@spacemansam3416]

Mr.Puzzle 😁

[@_Bosley]

Such a happy reaction for such a seemingly simple puzzle... love it!

[@mydemon]

"is this possible at all?" *THE DOUBT*

[@Arthurpiano9]

digger, deine videos sind richtig professionell geworden! mach weiter so :-) Macht richtig spaß zuzusehen

[@Mr.Puzzle]

Danke! 😎

[@Jen848]

Love this puzzle. Well done!

[@fewwiggle]

I think the hard part is imagining that each "cube" shares a portion of the other "cubes" -- IOW, the obvious move is to join two "faces" together to form an un-intersected cube.

[@PushSueAside]

I love the genuine gasp of surprise when you got it. It looked easy but, when you were puzzled it looked exciting. Cheers

[@debdottir]

Excellent in its simplicity!

[@damianlopez7630]

Your Kindly Voice and Enthusiastic Disposition Makes You an Ideal Host for a Children's Show based on Puzzle Solving. A Show to Awaken Children's Curiosity and Interest In Learning To Solve Puzzles which Carries Over to Problem Solving Skills Later In Life. You Have a Clear Idea of Your Great Potential.

[@DelsWoodTurning]

I really like this puzzle. Great Job.

[@changemylife1803]

Sometimes something so simple can be staring in your face, but you mind will make you think it impossible

[@fizixx]

Very cool puzzle. I bet they could come up with other solids too --- spheres, pyramids, cones, etc.

[@ashleybruton7076]

Very enjoyable the challenge and confusion love the simplicity

[@michaelrichter9427]

Rather than sketching out "all possible" arrangements, I would have numbered and measured the poles of each magnet. Take one object at random and take one of its half-cubes and arbitrarily mark it "1". Mark the magnet on one side as "+". Then systematically pick up one piece at a time, numbering each half consecutively and measure each magnet by putting it against "1+". If it repels, mark it also as "+" and if it attracts mark it at "-". (Using stickers, obviously, so you don't ruin the gorgeous puzzle!) Keep mapping until every magnet has been numbered 1-6 and tagged "+"/"-" by pole. After that it's easier to figure out which pieces can go where.

[@fishmeister2625]

For your final ever video you should solve the Lament Configuration puzzle box from Hellraiser.

[@vvsandgaming4648]

I draw alot of geometric shapes and I have drawn those cubes before as a perspective exercise. I drew them after I saw this puzzle in a friend's collection of puzzles and it took me around 47 minutes to solve and like so many others have suggested, yes I got stuck on the same principle you did.

[@NathanChisholm041]

As usual very cool! Any chance of 1080p 60fps?

[@Mr.Puzzle]

Not possible with my current main cam. I already thought about it but does it make sense for these kind of videos?

[@NathanChisholm041]

@@Mr.Puzzle That's OK mate it's still pin point sharp!

[@Samalanderable]

I have seen that organization of 3 cubes before... I think there is even a name for it. So I knew it was possible from the begining. The tricky part was I had thought you had tried it already based on your drawings. I thought the magnets could be keeping you from it. Bravo tho. I like puzzles like that. Deceptive.

[@missionimpuzzible3510]

ABSOLUTELY AMAZINGLY SIMPLE YET INTRIGUING PUZZLE!

[@J.C...]

I figured this one out immediately. It was obvious to me that each cube had to be made of part of the other cube. Meaning all 3 were interconnected. Once you realize that, it's easy.

[@pattidematteo36]

I saw the solution right away and was screaming it at the screen. Lol

[@lindy7985]

this is what i expected from the 2 part giraffe puzzle

[@Mr.Puzzle]

The Giraffe is the Giraffe.

[@Novaximus]

Great puzzle!

[@SparkieGoth]

You're too clever for that puzzle, that's why it took so long for you to find a relatively simple solution. Keep on puzzlin', Mr Puzzle! 👍🏻

[@Maninawig]

I love these deceptively simple puzzles. They seem to ask you to think outside of conventional puzzle solving.

[@leefisher6366]

Not sure, but this might have been recorded on October 1st, and it's a sort of 'Halfway April fool' puzzle. Honestly, how could they have been arranged all in a straight line? I think he's having a giraffe.

[@ryanmartie1244]

Mr. Puzzle, can you confirm if the puzzle is able to be solved but magnet polarity on some of the cube faces are the same (causing you to think orientation is wrong)? Basically, you can force some of the faces together because they repel each other but there are still 3 cubes.

[@ariesmars29]

That was fun to watch!

[@glasswinder]

Funny how afterwards it's that simple. I enjoy puzzles.

[@R.a.t.t.y]

So, was the final solution any of your original diagrams?

[@TeeLeigh66]

No, it wasn't.

[@gusbert]

I 3D printed a version without the magnets (which were not in the original design) and I found the solution surprisingly quickly. I guess the magnets actually made it more difficult?

[@TheloniousCube]

I think the 7/19 means July 2019 - I don' think his runs are quite that small (or in prime numbered lots) It's a great puzzle, though! Yes, it took me a lot longer than i thought it would

[@Mr.Puzzle]

Yes it's the production month and year

[@WhatAboutTheBee]

Not drawn as part of the initial solution set. Interesting!

[@xenaguy01]

7:20 Your reaction is *_PRICELESS!_* ROFL

[@Mr.Puzzle]

😆🤗

[@joshuascholar3220]

I was almost yelling at the screen. It's obvious before you start that what you have to do with two pieces is make ONE cube PLUS the negative space between the other piece and it being two cubes. But yes there is more than one configuration of two sides that form that negative space because translating a face through it's mating face also makes a cube.

[@Mr.Puzzle]

I was also getting desperate! 😅

[@kookyflukes9749]

Great concept that. As seemingly simple puzzle that is actually quite tricky.

[@ridercfo3368]

I am being honest from when you first showed the pieces I was able to see exactly how they fit. Don't think it would of taken me long at all.

[@Mr.Puzzle]

Nice!

[@SporeMystify]

That is what I expected the solution to look like after seeing the pieces

[@Mr.Puzzle]

Nice! 👏

[@aracheldra8763]

I don't own this puzzle, but I was able to guess the solution from the video description. My guess as to why the puzzle is so hard is that it's not iterative. It's easy to get one or two cubes, so you feel like you're on the right track, but getting all three needs a completely different approach. My first thought was to put two pieces in a 1×1×2 cube, but that obviously leaves no place for the third piece - somehow my mind went in that direction and got to the concave assembly as the most different way to do the arrangement.

[@curthatt6461]

Boy, that one had you going for awhile. Nice!

[@peterberry2691]

A very satisfying finish!

[@altaris6593]

That's the power of simplicity!

[@EricPetersen2922]

Very nice puzzle, it appeared much easier to solve than it was, which really makes it a very special puzzle(that’s one of my favorite types of puzzles) looks easy but isn’t. I think the polarity of the magnets mite have made it more difficult. Dexterity puzzles are frustrating for me. This is puzzle would be very enjoyable for my personal tastes. Very nice video!

[@perfection4749]

That looked fun!

[@JoshuaKennedy321]

I expected it to be a trick, like one of the 3 cubes is not solid but is an empty space you form by arranging the pieces the right way. The actual solution is way better because it's not "cheaty" in any way.

[@Mr.Puzzle]

While doing it I also thought there might be a trick involved. When seeing the final solution it makes it even more satisfying.

[@skaterslife6305]

Apparently not as easy as it looks ,For only three pieces to fool Mr. puzzle you are absolutely right It is a little difficult, and I love the fact that it is giving you a hard time to solve, thank you Mr. puzzle ,, It’s the simplicity of it that makes it appear difficult

[@jamesbrandon8582]

As adults, we look for logical patterns. Our flaw is that we over complicate things. Children on the other hand mostly ignore this thinking pattern and could probably solve it in under a minute. Get rid of that sketch book and just be random! This is a cool one, definitely a coffee table puzzle that you leave out for friends to try 👍

[@Mr.Puzzle]

Absolutely, sometimes it's better just just use a hands-on approach!

[@chyu4368]

7/19 means it was made in July 2019.

[@Mr.Puzzle]

Yes, I learned that. Thought it's a batch number.

[@Baki_B]

Really cool puzzle

[@PatrykSwata]

it's better if you show the difficulty rating after you've solved the puzzle, otherwise it's a bit of a spoiler

[@caster269]

A decent amount of people want the difficulty rating shown before hand because they may buy the puzzle after the intro rather than watching the solution. It’s there to appeal to the puzzle solving audience.

[@petrescuework-difficultcas6581]

I think some people might think "Ah naw that's a 3/5, that's not interesting for me, as it is not difficult enough / too difficult for me" and then stop watching the video. So the rating at the beginning can guide the audience to whether the puzzle might interest them or not.

[@Rumo82]

Oh no, I like to see the rating at the beginning. I'm watching the solution whether it's a low rating or a high one, it doesn't matter, but it gives a little clue and I like that.

[@neilisalive4892]

Ay, nice lens! I love the Sigma 18-35!

[@Mr.Puzzle]

Great lens, especially in combination with the Metabones Ultra Adapter

[@DWish808]

I spent $25 on this plus shipping, opened it up and had it together within 20-30 seconds. I wasn't sure if I should've felt proud or disappointed.

[@Mr.Puzzle]

Hehe nice. I think in my case it was absolutely worth it. Give it to others and enjoy watching them struggle! 🤗

[@DWish808]

@@Mr.Puzzle Exactly! I gave it to my youngest daughter and she gave up, so I'll be taking it to my brother's and parent's houses to see how they fair like I do all my other puzzles. I have a couple recommendations for you, but I need to look through your videos to make sure you haven't done them already. I've been watching you for a few years now, btw. Keep up the good work..errr.. play. :-D

[@georgecypher4568]

Its amazing how something so simple could be so mind bending….. Had me stumped as well Good one anyhow Mr. Puzzle !

[@damianlopez7630]

There is a Grand Reason Why I Subscribed To You Sir. Ja Wohl.

[@patriekvanwier9549]

It would have been nice to see your wife or kid try this puzzle. Just to see if they could pull it off. It looks so simple at the end!

[@alfonsobuonocore1271]

Hello Mr.Puzzle! I just solved this puzzle. It took me around 5 minutes but I think that was luck. I am quite interested in the 4 cubes and 5 cubes. I will buy them soon!

[@spaced4448]

Three pieces of wood 35 minutes well done that man. You really are the puzzle man 👍🏻

[@dylanbjornholtlund2791]

That sure is a beautiful puzzle

[@gillandro2]

Id love to see the tessarisis solved some time... great puzzle a 5 on the scale in my opinion

[@cransleyforge]

Where to buy your watch Mr. Puzzle?

[@TM-ym9to]

Naturally our brains think they should connect inwardly to construct the cubes, hence the initial difficulty. Thats the trick...by designing the blocks to only connect and form outwardly, that's enough to cause confusion👍 Talk about thinking outside the square(cube) 😉

[@Mr.Puzzle]

Yes! 😁

[@jeringjering]

I was surprised you got nowhere on paper. Once I put pen to paper, it was easy. Your video demonstrated nice workmanship by the builder. It took you so long because you have the left handed version :)

[@animakias26]

I enjoyed watching this :)

[@PaulMurrayCanberra]

Immediately you can se that the solution will be three cubes around a corner, because the corner of a cube has threefold symmetry. I'm betting it will be three cubes around a corner, each offset so that the whole is chiral but has rotational symmetry.

[@gabydewilde]

I solved it by looking at it and pausing the video. The winning train of thought was this: If 1 cube is made of 2 horizontal blocks there can be no further horizontal parts. (Lets say x) As having a result with 2 cubes with horizontal blocks is easily ruled out. (to state the obvious here: Each part only has 2 blocks, you can only stack 3 in the same orientation, 4 horizontal blocks is unobtainable) This also means there can be only 2 blocks in the other 2 directions (lets say y and z) You can then partially solve it with just 2 parts making only 1 cube! Block A of part A goes on block A of part B making cube 1. Then you have 2 blocks sticking out. (we will call these B) Those cant both be horizontal or both vertical. (block B of part A has a different orientation than block B of part B. ) This because you know the 3rd has blocks in 2 different orientations. There are only 4 ways to do that. Out of those 4 there are 2 where the block all to obviously ends up out of reach. Then. out of the remaining 2 one will not allow you to line up the blocks of the 3rd cube. :-)

[@D.V-s1z]

Ok but what happens if someone sent this to you but all the pieces are opposite of what the video shows?! I would love to know if it is solvable or not before I continue attempting.

[@Parsue]

As 3 parts are same sharp, don't think about the magnet first and try make 3 cubes first. Now we have half of solutions, then find the right magnet and solve it completely easily.