No clue how you don't even have 2k subs, your content is amazing and a lot of effort and creativity go into your videos, wish you the best of luck for 2024!!!!
Bro your putting so much effort into this also when or are you gonna make a square-6 also i am looking forward to buying this (if and when it will be on sale)
Maybe it’s possible to make a “hinge cube” with just 15 1x1s that are held together from just hinges on the sides and string like connections on the corners such that you can move centers into sides and sides into corners. This would be solved with a checker board pattern because there’s 5 cubes a layer. Each turn of a cube could move around 5 others, making it easy to scramble. Idk if it’s possible but it would be new. Came up with the idea when thinking about infinity cubes and those squares that rotate about each other I think is called auxetic art or something
If you want to use the angles 10, 15, 20 degrees, if you did them in the other order, the pieces would be much closer in size (because the smaller angled pieces would stretch longer to the corner of the square) which might be more aesthetically pleasing, though that's debatable. Also maybe there's some technical reason to avoid that I'm unaware of.
They'd be closer in volume, but you'd just end up with really long and thin pieces next to short and wide pieces. That might actually be superior for stability but I personally think it'd look worse.
Looks like a ton of fun. I really like the square one but it's kind of boring that you have to convert it to a cube before you can do anything. With these higher order cubes, it seems like you get to play with the shapes more. I also wonder if there are cool algorithms and methods that could be done which involved the strange shapes.
I think this would probably make the puzzle easier rather than harder, but have you considered adding extra cuts to the center layer? I once posited a sq1.5 with sq1 top and bottom and another cut in the middle layer perpendicular to the existing one. And then you could .5 each other size too.
A 2x2x1 central layer would not make the puzzle any easier or harder. It would just make it simpler to set up vertical turns. A concern on something with this many pieces would be stability, since making face turns would be less pleasant if there's any chance of them getting caught on the extra slice.
@@CubesMadeEasy I would think it would expand the scramble space since you could get into positions you can't possibly do with a normal square 1. At the very least the middle now has a variety of states instead of just 2.
I wonder how solvable it'd be with 12.85, 12.85, 19.3 degree pieces in each 45. Chose those numbers so that 3 small = 2 large pieces.
That's an interesting idea. I'm not sure, but leaning towards saying it would probably have more freedom of movement than the Square-5.
@@CubesMadeEasy people have probably had asked you for square 6 by now right?
1:03 formula simplifies to 4n+4
Good video keep going
This is an awesome puzzle keep going :)
No clue how you don't even have 2k subs, your content is amazing and a lot of effort and creativity go into your videos, wish you the best of luck for 2024!!!!
I think I'll get injured trying to solve this puzzle.
why the heck my brain melting when seeing this 💀
Bro your putting so much effort into this also when or are you gonna make a square-6 also i am looking forward to buying this (if and when it will be on sale)
i thought square 1 was hard 💀
Now we need a square-6!
niceee
when you start printing with ads, you should start selling them because a lot of people would probably be willing to buy this
I have an idea.
How about unbandaging a 2x2x1? Could be interesting and would work like a 2x2.
Maybe it’s possible to make a “hinge cube” with just 15 1x1s that are held together from just hinges on the sides and string like connections on the corners such that you can move centers into sides and sides into corners. This would be solved with a checker board pattern because there’s 5 cubes a layer. Each turn of a cube could move around 5 others, making it easy to scramble. Idk if it’s possible but it would be new. Came up with the idea when thinking about infinity cubes and those squares that rotate about each other I think is called auxetic art or something
Wow 🤓👆
@@carlosedmunds5531🧌👆
Sounds like the unhinged cube
Considering that you're subscribed to "Lankybox world" I'm not surprised that you say that.@@carlosedmunds5531
You don't have to say that if you don't understand it@@carlosedmunds5531
This is wild. Wow. Great job.
Harder to solve then 21x21 rubiks cube
That looks intimidating! Good job, dedication
Last time I saw a big square one it was a square 2 💀
Underrated af
the formula could instrad be x_n = 4(n+1)
Who's hyped for square 6
What about a square three in 4D
Here before it gets famous
You very underrated it's so 😔
Where can i buy it btw?
Not available yet, unfortunately. I'll make a post when it is
MAKE A SQUARE 6
At solve square5
Do the square 20
square 7
Impossible
nice 👌
I wonder what O5 cube will look like 🤔
What about the O1 and the O3 cube to
The O cube is the original (skewb-based) made by NKCubed, and the O3 cube would have been the centers of a curvy copter 3 in a cage.
Make square-6
Great video ❤
wow
Great job
Cool cube
Cubes made easy is the name (builds a square 5 that would take forever to solve and be absurdly complicated to solve)
I think cubes made easy might be making cubes way harder 🤔🤔🤔
If you want to use the angles 10, 15, 20 degrees, if you did them in the other order, the pieces would be much closer in size (because the smaller angled pieces would stretch longer to the corner of the square) which might be more aesthetically pleasing, though that's debatable. Also maybe there's some technical reason to avoid that I'm unaware of.
They'd be closer in volume, but you'd just end up with really long and thin pieces next to short and wide pieces. That might actually be superior for stability but I personally think it'd look worse.
Realy great work. Happy Christmas.
awesome. when are u gonna put in on sale or put the 3d model in the desc
I'm working on it! Goal is to have a lot of my puzzles available within the next few months.
@@CubesMadeEasy thank u for answering, ill be waiting
Looks like a ton of fun. I really like the square one but it's kind of boring that you have to convert it to a cube before you can do anything. With these higher order cubes, it seems like you get to play with the shapes more. I also wonder if there are cool algorithms and methods that could be done which involved the strange shapes.
Yeah, the most difficult part of solving this was fixing the shape. Having algorithms, or at least a more consistent strategy, would be nice.
bet he'll love making a square-6
now make a SQUARE-√2
I’d cry if I had to solve that thing, my god
Make gear mirror megaminx 90000 x 90000 cube!
Your channel is so underrated
Insane work, keep it going!
That's a lot of pieces
3 piece sizes is way harder to solve
Can i buy it?
Not yet, unfortunately. I'll make a post when it's available.
Square 6, 7, 8, 9 at least needed
Now make the square 6
and the squeare-10?
im solve square 10
Good. Now make a square 6.
What's next?
Make a Square 6 (Sq6) please
Have you thought of a waterfall-2?
That's basically what the Waterfall Cube Supreme is.
@@CubesMadeEasy I meant by the concept of the square-2 applied to the waterfall cube.
make a square root 2
SQUARE-6 PLEASE
Make square-6
Make square-6
Square 6 pls
How would be called a puzzle like this one, but with middle layer with two turn's planes?, so 4 parts instead of 2 in the middle layer.
Do a square 7 now
SQ - 6 place🙏
Make a square 6
CME: Yes?
Any normal person:
Yeah, wtf
Square 6😅😅
Square-6 now.
.... square-6?
Make a Square-G64
Square-2.5
Amazing!
Thanks
I hate it.
Make a sq 6
Square-69
Square 100
Square-6?
I think this would probably make the puzzle easier rather than harder, but have you considered adding extra cuts to the center layer? I once posited a sq1.5 with sq1 top and bottom and another cut in the middle layer perpendicular to the existing one. And then you could .5 each other size too.
A 2x2x1 central layer would not make the puzzle any easier or harder. It would just make it simpler to set up vertical turns. A concern on something with this many pieces would be stability, since making face turns would be less pleasant if there's any chance of them getting caught on the extra slice.
@@CubesMadeEasy I would think it would expand the scramble space since you could get into positions you can't possibly do with a normal square 1. At the very least the middle now has a variety of states instead of just 2.
Make a square-6
make a square 12
*Promo sm*
Make A Square 6
squive
uhhhh
the square 4 is illustrated inaccurately at 0:50
You're right. I must have missed that when editing.
wtf!
make a square-6
square-6
I’m ready for the square-6 😂
Why.
1:01 x=4n+4 is literally the same
You're right.
Hexagon-3 please
Could be interesting.
the title got me choking on my chocy milk
I want to see square- -1 lol
Have you thought about using commutators
I am learning to use those, but I'm not sure how much they'd help on the Square-5 specifically.
@@CubesMadeEasy solve the white side intuitively and use commutators to solve the yellow side
floppy super square-5
what program is this 0:24
Onshape