I'm surprised why people call a Rubik's cube as $2 \times2\times2$ or $3\times3\times3$? It's a CUBE! Isn't saying $2\times2$ or $3\times3$ cube (or rather just $2$ or $3$) sufficient?
Asked
Active
Viewed 196 times
0
-
6It's a CUBE! Doesn't $2$ or $3$ explain it fully? – user642796 Feb 03 '13 at 11:54
-
Explain what? $~$ – Daniel Pietrobon Feb 03 '13 at 11:56
-
damn! that's a slap on my face. But still, what's the reason for all this redundancy? – Jaskirat Feb 03 '13 at 11:57
-
In fact, the Rubik's cube already is a sufficient nameing for the toy made out of $21$ parts with $54$ coloured fields, of which $48$ can change their position relative to the fixed frame. – Hagen von Eitzen Feb 03 '13 at 12:06
-
and what's the problem? :| – A Ricko Maulidar Feb 03 '13 at 12:16
-
1There are 3x4x5 puzzles as well. All sides having an equal length isn't a given. – Sebastian Paaske Tørholm Feb 18 '13 at 10:06