"Puzzling skills" from Yahoo.com

Questioninggeller · 3rd December 2006, 04:38 PM

On the Yahoo.com homepage there is a link to a video that asks Can this guy really solve a Rubik's Cube blindfolded? Rather interesting yahoo has given this trick more coverage, size proportion wise, on their front page then the news articles.

Brown · 5th December 2006, 11:53 PM

Could it be what it purports to be? Sure it could.

But I'm skeptical about it.

The reviews that I read make no mention of two principles that might be--and some would probably say definitely are--at work here.

Garrette · 6th December 2006, 06:34 AM

I'm with Brown. I don't see anything outrageous in the idea of someone determining the necessary moves, memorizing them, and then performing them when (effectively) blindfolded.

But this video was not convincing in that it didn't rule out other possibilities. I can think of one of the principles Brown refers to, and another which may or may not be the same as his second.

Conclusion: Possibly real, probably not.

Brown · 6th December 2006, 02:21 PM

Let me be a little more specific about the principles that I think may be at work.

The first is that many cube solvers use a standard set of memorized moves to achieve a particular result, say, moving one cube to a particular spot with a particular orientation. These memorized moves CAN be performed quickly and without need for eyesight. In addition, many of these moves seem to be extremely complex, but to the solver, they are routine and are done entirely by "feel."

The second is that people who wear blindfolds can peek. There are literally dozens of ways to peek from behind a blindfold, but the secrets used by those who peek are beyond the scope of this thread. (At TAM2, Mr. Randi used volunteers to demonstrate that it is difficult to have an ordinary blindfold that prevents peeking.)

In other words, the solver doesn't need to see the Rubik's cube all the time to solve it. He only needs to glimpse it from time to time to check the status of his solving it. After the glimpse, he decides what intermediate result he wants, executes a series of pre-planned moves by "feel," then glimpses at the cube again to see what intermediate result to pursue next.

Of course, there are computer programs that can solve a Rubik's cube without having to check the status of the cube from time to time. There is no reason--other than the degree of mental discipline required--why a person couldn't employ a similar algorithm and execute it without use of eyesight.

But as I said, I'm skeptical that this is what happened in the video. There are too many pauses between series of moves, and too many possibilities to peek.

Garrette · 6th December 2006, 02:26 PM

Hooray for me! Seeing-while-blindfolded is the first principle I thought of, and fairly obvious from the video. I did not know, but guessed that he only needed to check his progress occasionally as opposed to seeing it continuously based on his motions.

My second, not-so-sure principle was that of a set of moves that would work regardless of the initial mix. My hesitation was in considering if the cube started from a solved position and the solver applied the set moves. Would it end up back in a solved position? I had/have a hard time thinking so.

A third principle/method that occurred to me after I wrote my earlier post was that of tactile differences between different color cube faces. A few times, he stops and appears to feel around on the cube. This is a different version of peeking, I suppose.

Azrael 5 · 6th December 2006, 04:15 PM

Why is this in here? Is it a purported trick?

BPScooter · 7th December 2006, 02:43 AM

I'd be curious what the other explanations are--the spirits guided him with second sight, or he has chromo-tactile senses yet to be explored by science, etc., or the predestined will of deity led him to be really lucky. Well, you can't rule all that out, can you?? (snotty attitude feigned for laughs)

Garrette · 7th December 2006, 06:07 AM

Originally Posted by Azrael 5

Why is this in here? Is it a purported trick?

I don't know why it was originally posted here, but I have seen a version of this done as a trick. It was a month or two ago, a special with an Irish magician. He had a rubik's cube and gave another to the spectator. They each put theirs behind their backs, gave it whatever twists they wanted (I think the same number for each but can't remember with certainty), and brought them out.

The cubes weren't solved, but they did have the same pattern on each face.

My guess is mechanical (mathematical may be a better word), assuming the spectator wasn't a stooge.

deBergerac · 7th December 2006, 09:18 AM

The moment I get behind a better computer I will watch the video. But it is a nice coincidence that I saw a trick done with a Rubik's cube in my magic club this Tuesday.

No peeking and the cube could be solved in only a few seconds, but of course it is more impressive if you work on it for some time.

3rd December 2006, 04:38 PM	#1
Questioninggeller Master Poster Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 2,551	"Puzzling skills" from Yahoo.com On the Yahoo.com homepage there is a link to a video that asks Can this guy really solve a Rubik's Cube blindfolded? Rather interesting yahoo has given this trick more coverage, size proportion wise, on their front page then the news articles.
	__________________ "Paranormal phenomena have a habit of going away whenever they are tested under rigorous conditions. This is why the $740,000 reward of James Randi, offered to anyone who can demonstrate a paranormal effect under proper scientific controls, is safe." --Richard Dawkins

5th December 2006, 11:53 PM	#2
Brown Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Twin Cities, Canada Posts: 9,117	Could it be what it purports to be? Sure it could. But I'm skeptical about it. The reviews that I read make no mention of two principles that might be--and some would probably say definitely are--at work here.
	__________________ Klaatu: I'm impatient with stupidity. My people have learned to live without it. Mr. Harley: I'm afraid my people haven't. I am very sorry. I wish it were otherwise. -- The Day The Earth Stood Still, screenplay by Edmund H. North "Don't you get me wrong. I only want to know." -- Judas in Jesus Christ Superstar, lyrics by Tim Rice

6th December 2006, 06:34 AM	#3
Garrette Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 7,964	I'm with Brown. I don't see anything outrageous in the idea of someone determining the necessary moves, memorizing them, and then performing them when (effectively) blindfolded. But this video was not convincing in that it didn't rule out other possibilities. I can think of one of the principles Brown refers to, and another which may or may not be the same as his second. Conclusion: Possibly real, probably not.
Garrette Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 7,964	__________________ My kids still love me.

6th December 2006, 02:21 PM	#4
Brown Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Twin Cities, Canada Posts: 9,117	Let me be a little more specific about the principles that I think may be at work. The first is that many cube solvers use a standard set of memorized moves to achieve a particular result, say, moving one cube to a particular spot with a particular orientation. These memorized moves CAN be performed quickly and without need for eyesight. In addition, many of these moves seem to be extremely complex, but to the solver, they are routine and are done entirely by "feel." The second is that people who wear blindfolds can peek. There are literally dozens of ways to peek from behind a blindfold, but the secrets used by those who peek are beyond the scope of this thread. (At TAM2, Mr. Randi used volunteers to demonstrate that it is difficult to have an ordinary blindfold that prevents peeking.) In other words, the solver doesn't need to see the Rubik's cube all the time to solve it. He only needs to glimpse it from time to time to check the status of his solving it. After the glimpse, he decides what intermediate result he wants, executes a series of pre-planned moves by "feel," then glimpses at the cube again to see what intermediate result to pursue next. Of course, there are computer programs that can solve a Rubik's cube without having to check the status of the cube from time to time. There is no reason--other than the degree of mental discipline required--why a person couldn't employ a similar algorithm and execute it without use of eyesight. But as I said, I'm skeptical that this is what happened in the video. There are too many pauses between series of moves, and too many possibilities to peek.
	__________________ Klaatu: I'm impatient with stupidity. My people have learned to live without it. Mr. Harley: I'm afraid my people haven't. I am very sorry. I wish it were otherwise. -- The Day The Earth Stood Still, screenplay by Edmund H. North "Don't you get me wrong. I only want to know." -- Judas in Jesus Christ Superstar, lyrics by Tim Rice

6th December 2006, 02:26 PM	#5
Garrette Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 7,964	Hooray for me! Seeing-while-blindfolded is the first principle I thought of, and fairly obvious from the video. I did not know, but guessed that he only needed to check his progress occasionally as opposed to seeing it continuously based on his motions. My second, not-so-sure principle was that of a set of moves that would work regardless of the initial mix. My hesitation was in considering if the cube started from a solved position and the solver applied the set moves. Would it end up back in a solved position? I had/have a hard time thinking so. A third principle/method that occurred to me after I wrote my earlier post was that of tactile differences between different color cube faces. A few times, he stops and appears to feel around on the cube. This is a different version of peeking, I suppose.
Garrette Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 7,964	__________________ My kids still love me.

6th December 2006, 04:15 PM	#6
Azrael 5 Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Yorkshire,Uk Posts: 4,219	Why is this in here? Is it a purported trick?
	__________________ "I achieve these results through a mixture of magic,misdirection,suggestion and showmanship"-Derren Brown Photography here

7th December 2006, 02:43 AM	#7
BPScooter Muse Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 783	I'd be curious what the other explanations are--the spirits guided him with second sight, or he has chromo-tactile senses yet to be explored by science, etc., or the predestined will of deity led him to be really lucky. Well, you can't rule all that out, can you?? (snotty attitude feigned for laughs)
BPScooter Muse Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 783

7th December 2006, 06:07 AM	#8
Garrette Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 7,964	Originally Posted by Azrael 5 Why is this in here? Is it a purported trick? I don't know why it was originally posted here, but I have seen a version of this done as a trick. It was a month or two ago, a special with an Irish magician. He had a rubik's cube and gave another to the spectator. They each put theirs behind their backs, gave it whatever twists they wanted (I think the same number for each but can't remember with certainty), and brought them out. The cubes weren't solved, but they did have the same pattern on each face. My guess is mechanical (mathematical may be a better word), assuming the spectator wasn't a stooge.
Garrette Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 7,964	__________________ My kids still love me.

7th December 2006, 09:18 AM	#9
deBergerac New Doc on the Block Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Uppsala (Sweden) Posts: 445	The moment I get behind a better computer I will watch the video. But it is a nice coincidence that I saw a trick done with a Rubik's cube in my magic club this Tuesday. No peeking and the cube could be solved in only a few seconds, but of course it is more impressive if you work on it for some time.