Think about Loose Coupling | |
PerlMonks |
RE: RE: Rubixby kilinrax (Deacon) |
on Oct 02, 2000 at 23:26 UTC ( [id://34962]=note: print w/replies, xml ) | Need Help?? |
I was under the impression that a more common notation was 'U,D,F,B,L,R for 90° clockwise turns, 'U²,D²,F²,B²,L²,R²' for 90° turns, and either 'U',D',F',B',L',R'' ('prime') or 'U-1,D-1,F-1,B-1,L-1,R-1' for 90° anti-clockwise.
The obvious advantage of this system is that U' or U-1 imply the inverse of U.
I would be inclined to agree with you to the security of the cryptosystem. Istr that a 2x2 cube has only ~107 permutations, which strikes me as a rather small number compared to those people throw around when talking about PGP (but then, i am not a cryptologist). The number of permutations increases exponentially with cube size, so if you a use a bigger one, this may cease to be a problem. It would be really cool if you could use the resulting cryptosystem using nothing but a Rubik's cube, some paper, and a lot of free time (à la '<cite>Pontifex</cite>'), but maybe that's a little optimistic..... Some interesting cube-related links from my bookmarks:
In Section
Meditations
|
|