Four ninths of a Rubik's Cube


Originally published at:


1x1 is really more my speed.


I always felt that a 1x2 Rubik’s cube would be optimally pointless.


2X1, heretic!


That the first bullet point doesn’t begin with a capital letter, unlike all the others, makes me think something like this happened:

Employee: Ok, boss, I’ve written the product copy and uploaded it to Amazon. We’ve already had several hundred views.
Boss: Great! You made sure to tell people that it doesn’t have any fabrics, right?
Employee: What? No. Why would that be necessary?
Boss: You fool! That’s the most important aspect! It should be the first thing anybody knows about it! We’ll lose everything if people think this might possibly contain fabrics! Update the page immediately!
Employee: Ok, I’ll get to it after lunch.
Boss: No! Don’t you understand? There’s no time! Not even for capitalization! Every second that page is up without informing potential customers about the lack of fabrics, our liability increases! People could die! DO IT NOW!


I guess you could say it’s fifteen twenty-sixths as difficult to solve:

(I realize this post risks starting a holy war over difficulty metrics. Hey, I’m for quarter turn - no apologies!)

  1. Rotate x-axis 90°
  2. Rotate z-axis 90°
  3. Cube is now broken.


A flat square?


I wouldn’t recommend buying a cheap knock-off version. I own the original Tower Cube 2x2x3, created by Katsuhiko Okamoto and produced by Gentosha in Japan. It is more expensive and definitely hard to find, but worth every penny.


Save your money, folks. The 3x3x3x3 hypercube will be a tie-in toy for Winkle in Time


I thought the same, but then (following the link from @Logolepsy), I saw this

These are some fun toys indeed.


Does it contain fabrics?


This thing just looks wrong.


This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.