physical puzzles (updated)
Note (Feb 1, 2007): The info on this page has moved here, and the list is here. This page is hereby obsolete - you can post comments to it, but the list is not being maintained.
(note: this is an updated version of this post)
In addition to the verbal sort of puzzles, I like physical ones. For my reference, and for those who may wish to bribe me, I've collated a partial list. (I'll try to keep it up to date.)
Last updated Sept 1st, 2006 Dec 27, 2006.
Notes:
Some sources: (Unfortunately, puzzles seem more popular in other countries.)
Some references:
Some Inane chatter:
I'm also getting somewhat interested in the theory behind these things. For example, there's some interesting discussion of the six-piece burr here (although past the first few pages, most of it starts going over my head). On the other hand, though the discussion is interesting, the puzzles themselves quickly diverge into nightmarish arrangement/sequence puzzles, which is not ideal. But solving and abstractly considering are different things. Thinking about disentanglement puzzles is interesting, too.
Random Cool Links:
(note: this is an updated version of this post)
In addition to the verbal sort of puzzles, I like physical ones. For my reference, and for those who may wish to bribe me, I've collated a partial list. (I'll try to keep it up to date.)
Last updated Sept 1st, 2006 Dec 27, 2006.
Notes:
- I've done my best to locate pictures and/or analogues (listed as 'aka'), but I am not positive on them. Finding congruence is tricky because some puzzles look different but solve the same (e.g. Centipede, Desperado, The Tree Puzzle, Tower of Hanoi and Squaring Off are all variations on the Chinese Patience Puzzle, but look quite different.)
- It's not always obvious how to categorize puzzles. I've tried to sort them by underlying solution method.
- Dis/Assembly Puzzles
These are puzzles where a number of pieces have to be put together to form a single shape. These are some of my favorites, especially when the pieces are as similar as possible and the overall shape elegant. Some variations have a large number of dissimilar pieces, in which case the puzzle becomes more of a sequence/pattern puzzle (see below).
- Wooden Nest similar to (but not the same as) Locked Nest (from a set) (~early 2006) Despite the haphazard appearance, the construction is not too complicated provided you can make a basic start. The downside is that it does take time to rebuild. One of my favorites, just because of how it looks when assembled.
- Star Box (or something similar) (~early 2006). Although this is a one-piece-is-the-key puzzle, it's not obvious how to put it together and there are several steps needed to operate the key. Good balance of challenge/elegance.
- Kumiki Barrel-type.
- Barrel aka Barrel (slight variant in appearance). (~2005) Pieces are dissimilar, but out of necessity for the shape, not just for the sake of confusion. Reasonably elegant solution overall, easily repeated once known. Fairly well-balanced in terms of challenge / elegance.
- Riddler (~Jun 2006). Solves the same as the above. A bit more challenging because the pieces are more similar to each other, and the overall shape not obvious. Unfortunately, the pieces do not make a very tight fit.
- Barrel aka Barrel (slight variant in appearance). (~2005) Pieces are dissimilar, but out of necessity for the shape, not just for the sake of confusion. Reasonably elegant solution overall, easily repeated once known. Fairly well-balanced in terms of challenge / elegance.
- Diagonal 6-piece Burr. This is a simple puzzle, and makes a nice shape when done. The examples all have the same construction method.
- Wooden one like the first picture here (from my parents, ~May 2006). Very nice looking.
- Transparent-plastic one similar to the wooden one, but with a different outer form. (~1990s) The form is identical to the star puzzle below. It's pretty, but the puzzle is pretty old, so it looks and feels somewhat shoddy.
- Spherical type (don't know official name) aka Soccer Block (mine is not quite as pictured: it's from some convention, made of plastic with a logo of a random company) (~1990s).
- Wooden one like the first picture here (from my parents, ~May 2006). Very nice looking.
- Star Puzzle (~Jul 206). This is quite similar to the 6-piece burr above, and in fact, the outer shape is identical to the transparent-plastic version. However, whereas the above 6-piece burrs have 3 types of pieces, this puzzle's pieces are all identical. That means there is no 'key' piece, and so the solution is not quite as obvious.
It's somewhat more loose than the 6-piece burr, and pulling on any two opposite pieces causes the thing to expand and fall apart. It can then be put back together in two ways - the hard way (by reversing the expansion, which requires quite a bit of dexterity), and the easy way, which is fairly elegant. Sadly, I had read about the existence of the easy way prior to getting this, so did not get a chance to solve it 'honestly'.
- Yin Yang Puzzle (~Oct 2006). The picture is pretty, but the reality is less appealing. The nature of the puzzle is such that the pieces stay together sloppily, and it's just not attractive. The puzzle itself is simple, the solution isn't elegant at all and is almost purely alignment-based. Overall, not worthwhile.
- Third Dimension from 'Brain Benders' by Pavilion (August 2006). Assembly, all similar pieces + one key. Pretty simple once you figure out the desired shape. Requires some dexterity to assemble, and it's poorly made, so doesn't really hold together.
- Pentagle Woodchuck from 'Brain Benders' by Pavilion (August 2006). Assembly, several types of pieces, two keys. Looks imposing when you see the number of pieces, but actually pretty simple. Requires dexterity to assemble, poorly made.
- Wooden Nest similar to (but not the same as) Locked Nest (from a set) (~early 2006) Despite the haphazard appearance, the construction is not too complicated provided you can make a basic start. The downside is that it does take time to rebuild. One of my favorites, just because of how it looks when assembled.
- Dis/Entanglement Puzzles:
These are puzzles where you have to free, extricate or otherwise separate two pieces (and then put them back together). Commonly, the goal is to remove a ring from a larger assembly of parts. Some of these can be very good, and are typically a lot of fun to play with. The downside is that it's hard to find ones that look good, seeing as they are commonly a mix of mismatched parts. As with assembly puzzles, there are variations which end up being sequence/pattern puzzles (see below).
- Cast Spiral of the Hanayama Collection (~Aug 2006). Very pretty and well made. Not too difficult to take apart, and the solution for taking apart is fairly elegant. However, the pieces are all slightly different, and to put it back together, you have to order them in a specific way. This makes putting it back together a bit of an annoying sequence puzzle, since you already know the trick to actually getting it to fit. My recommendation is not to mix up the pieces.
- Cast Heart of the Hanayama Collection (from sabletiger and _tigerprincess_, Dec 2006). Pretty to look at, but the chain means you will get tangled, and some dexterity is required. Solution is fairly straightforward, especially if you've dealt with disentanglement puzzles before, but elegant for all that.
- Lucky Clover (~Oct 2006). Picture is pretty, but the puzzle itself isn't attractive. The pieces do not 'hold' together when solved and don't have that polished surreal look (unlike, say the Hanayama Collection).
I can't vouch for the solution because I haven't solved it (yet, anyway). Once you undo the pictured arrangement, the thing dissolves into a very messy tangle. It may be that there is an elegant solution, but I got fed up with it after a few days. There is just too much dexterity required to isolate the pieces and keep track of their positions.
- Arch Rival from the IQ Collection series (from mashats & increp, ~May 2006). Looks complex, but the solution is pretty straightforward. The phrasing of the challenge is a bit odd, though.
- Casper aka Handcuffs aka Horse Shoe aka Wire 6 aka Old Shackles. Basic starter disentanglement puzzle. (from sabletiger or Landon & diana_nguyen, I forget. ~2005)
- Cupid aka Jester (from parents, ~Jul 2006). Slight variation on Casper, above, via the addition of two pieces. A bit more difficult, but similar solution.
- Dinner Bell aka Tinker's Bell (also here) (from sabletiger or Landon & diana_nguyen, I forget. ~2005). A complex disentanglement puzzle, somewhat confusing because it's not obvious what is allowed and what isn't. Interesting solution.
- Unknown - Two circles with string, from 'Metal Madness' by Pavilion (August 2006). Very basic disentanglement, almost not a puzzle at all.
- Alignment. This is a type of disentanglement puzzle where the pieces (commonly made of nails or very thick wire) have gaps in them such that the goal is to align the gaps with one another to be able to separate the pieces. The pieces are often identical. I'm not a big fan of this type of puzzle, since it often boils down to just fiddling with the thing, but some are better than others.
- Cast Baroq of the Hanayama Collection (~Aug 2006). At this rate, I'm going to be conflicted about all the puzzles in this collection. Very pretty and well made, and the solution has aesthetically pleasing steps. However, halfway through, there is a step that requires some force. At first, I assumed this was not a legal step, but subsequent experimentation showed that this is the right solution. Presumably, the needed force is due to manufacturing imperfections, but it's unfortunate.
- Cast Elk of the Hanayama Collection (from sabletiger and _tigerprincess_, Dec 2006). Quite good. Pretty, solid construction, reasonably elegant solution, decent difficulty, no issues (unlike some other Hanayama puzzles).
- Double G, from 'Metal Madness' by Pavilion (August 2006). Basic two identical pieces alignmnet, two steps.
- Double Twist, from 'Metal Madness' by Pavilion (August 2006). Three-step alignment (have to get the small piece from one loop to the middle to the other loop and then out).
- Eights, from 'Metal Madness' by Pavilion (August 2006). A bit more complex alignment puzzle.
- Twin Tangle, from 'Metal Madness' by Pavilion (August 2006). A rare interesting alignment puzzle, this is the only one in the 'Metal Madness' set worth getting/playing with.
- Cast Baroq of the Hanayama Collection (~Aug 2006). At this rate, I'm going to be conflicted about all the puzzles in this collection. Very pretty and well made, and the solution has aesthetically pleasing steps. However, halfway through, there is a step that requires some force. At first, I assumed this was not a legal step, but subsequent experimentation showed that this is the right solution. Presumably, the needed force is due to manufacturing imperfections, but it's unfortunate.
- Cast Spiral of the Hanayama Collection (~Aug 2006). Very pretty and well made. Not too difficult to take apart, and the solution for taking apart is fairly elegant. However, the pieces are all slightly different, and to put it back together, you have to order them in a specific way. This makes putting it back together a bit of an annoying sequence puzzle, since you already know the trick to actually getting it to fit. My recommendation is not to mix up the pieces.
- Sequence/Pattern Puzzles:
These are puzzles where you generally know what to do, but not the order in which to do it, or have to put a number of dissimilar pieces together into some shape. Solving these is usually a combination of trial & error and working through the right sequence of steps. Some of these can be good, but they are not my most preferred.
- Chinese Patience Puzzles. This is a classic sequence puzzle - there are only two discrete operations you can perform on a number of rings, and the order is the key to the solution. With each ring, the length of the needed sequence doubles, so a blind search is futile. These are all disentanglement puzzles, but due to the nature of the solution, they fall here rather than above.
- Desperado aka Steps (from Landon and diana_nguyen, ~2005). Nice looking, and the setup makes it look suitably impossible.
- Centipede aka Catacombs aka Patience (from mashats & increp, ~2005). This is the classic version of the puzzle. Requires a good bit of dexterity, which is one of my less honed skills.
- The Tree Puzzle (from _tigerprincess_ & sabletiger, ~early 2006). This has the distinction of being the most complex of the three (7 steps, I think), and the one that requires the least dexterity.
- Desperado aka Steps (from Landon and diana_nguyen, ~2005). Nice looking, and the setup makes it look suitably impossible.
- Star of David (don't know official name) - this is a Magen David broken up into six pieces (~1990s). While it is ostensibly an assembly puzzle, it is pretty obvious what needs to be done, all the pieces are dissimilar, and arriving at the solution is just a matter of figuring out the proper arrangement, which is why it falls here.
- Varikon (~1980s, I think). This is a decent sequence puzzle - there is a basic sequence of steps that quickly leads to the solution. I think it's the least frustrating sequence puzzle I've seen.
- Porcupine from the IQ Collection series (from my grandmother on my mother's side, ~May 2006). The manufacturer's description states that this puzzle is "genius-level" and encourages you to "manipulate wooden rods" (yay juvenile humor). This thing is challenging because you can't see the interaction of the rods, and memorizing them really would take a genius. Fairly easy to solve with a sheet of paper and some time, though.
- Six-Piece Burr from 'Brain Benders' by Pavilion (August 2006). Assembly puzzle of the six piece burr, similar to the examples of Diagonal 6-Piece Burr above. All the pieces are dissimilar, so solving it is a matter of figuring out the right combination. Annoying. Plus, it's poorly made, doesn't really hold together.
- Rubic's Cube and Square One (unsolved) (1990s). Both of these are good examples of sequence puzzles - the available steps are immediately obvious, but figuring out a solution takes a long time. I figured out how to solve the Cube in college and have since forgotten the method. Never did get Square One.
- Jigsaw puzzles. These are pretty much by definition pattern puzzles. We have a few, and they fit nicely into the 'sequence/arrangement' category, so I figured I'd include them.
- Chinese Patience Puzzles. This is a classic sequence puzzle - there are only two discrete operations you can perform on a number of rings, and the order is the key to the solution. With each ring, the length of the needed sequence doubles, so a blind search is futile. These are all disentanglement puzzles, but due to the nature of the solution, they fall here rather than above.
- Dexterity Puzzles:
These are puzzles which require nimble hands to be able to put something together or balance it, etc.
- Cast News (~Jun 2006) of the Hanayama collection. I'm somewhat conflicted about this puzzle. Aesthetically, it's as good as it gets, and the real solution is very elegant. It seems like the ideal puzzle.
Trouble is, there is too great a leap of deduction needed to arrive directly at the solution. The puzzle has no external leverage to operate on: something inside is loose (you can hear it), and you can move the loose pieces by orienting the puzzle. The initial impression is that this is a pure dexterity puzzle with the added problem of not knowing what you're doing. This is not the case, but there's no way to know that.
I went through three stages.
1) Random. I just played with it and eventually got it to come apart. This took about 20 minutes.
2) Educated method 1. After seeing the mechanism, I came up with a better way, but it still took a bit of trying to get it to work. Maybe 2-3 minutes each.
3) Correct solution. After some more play, I figured out the right way to solve it. With it, you can take it apart in ten seconds.
It would be much more satisfying to be able to arrive at the correct solution from the start. If you happen to want to solve it, here are hints that don't give it away, but make it possible to reason out (rot13:
1) Gur gjb cvrprf ner vqragvpny.
2) Rnpu cvrpr vf flzzrgevpny nobhg gur gjb cynarf crecraqvphyne gb gur snpr (nfvqr sebz gur qrpbengvir yrggrevat ba gur fhesnpr).
3) Nofbyhgryl ab sbepr vf erdhverq. Jvgu gur pbeerpg fbyhgvba, gur cvrprf yvsg ncneg sebz rnpu bgure.
- Sandpiper (from mashats & increp, ~May 2006). Balancing puzzle. The official solution is interesting, but there are more ways to solve it than that.
- Cast News (~Jun 2006) of the Hanayama collection. I'm somewhat conflicted about this puzzle. Aesthetically, it's as good as it gets, and the real solution is very elegant. It seems like the ideal puzzle.
- Puzzles I like/want:
In general, there are several criteria I look at:- elegance: Probably the most important. Elegance means that the solution is difficult to find, but once found, it is clean and obvious. Re-solving the puzzle should not take undue time, and dexterity should have little relevance. (You won't know for sure unless you solve it first, but in many cases, you can guesstimate. This probably has an elegant solution, this probably does not.) Generally speaking, assembly and disentanglement tend to be more elegant, whereas labyrinths, transposer, tantrix, arrangement, dexterity and non-symmetrical assembly tend to be less so.
- aesthetics: Puzzles that look good are preferred, as I have a bunch displayed. I live in an apartment, so compactness is also nice.
- difficulty: More difficult puzzles are preferred. However, difficult puzzles are easy to find: just go and grab a rubic's cube or an arbitrarily complex chinese patience puzzle. Elegance and aesthetics are more appreciated.
Some examples of puzzles I think I'd enjoy.- Hanayama Cast Metal, some of which are very pretty:
Chain,
Disk,
Flag,
Coaster,
O'Gear.
- Assembly:
Triple Cross,
Hypbrid,
Classic Set,
Sattelite,
Dovetail Burr.
- Disentanglement: Parallel Dimensions (I've solved this one but don't have it - it looks a bit ugly/B&D but has a ridiculously elegant solution.), Wise Guy, Big Shot, Triple Play. If I were a girl, the solvable ones of these would be perfect.
- elegance: Probably the most important. Elegance means that the solution is difficult to find, but once found, it is clean and obvious. Re-solving the puzzle should not take undue time, and dexterity should have little relevance. (You won't know for sure unless you solve it first, but in many cases, you can guesstimate. This probably has an elegant solution, this probably does not.) Generally speaking, assembly and disentanglement tend to be more elegant, whereas labyrinths, transposer, tantrix, arrangement, dexterity and non-symmetrical assembly tend to be less so.
Some sources: (Unfortunately, puzzles seem more popular in other countries.)
- Puzzlemaster (Canada)
- Bits & Pieces
- Potty Puzzles (UK)
- Faze 3 (UK)
- Cleverwood
- Livewire Puzzles (Canada)
- Frik n Frak
- Cast Puzzle (Japan - Hanayama Puzzles) (These can be found in other stores, and many of them rank high on the aesthetics scale mentioned below. Don't know how difficult they are and/or how elegant the solutions are, but I am interested in finding out.)
Some references:
- Rob's Puzzle Page. A ridiculous collection, with references to stores - at some point maybe I'll go through and point out ones that appeal to me.
- Polyhedral Dissection Discussion.
- Design Competition.
Some Inane chatter:
I'm also getting somewhat interested in the theory behind these things. For example, there's some interesting discussion of the six-piece burr here (although past the first few pages, most of it starts going over my head). On the other hand, though the discussion is interesting, the puzzles themselves quickly diverge into nightmarish arrangement/sequence puzzles, which is not ideal. But solving and abstractly considering are different things. Thinking about disentanglement puzzles is interesting, too.
Random Cool Links:
- 5-Dimensional Rubik's cube.
- Puzzle.
- NotPron (self-described hardest puzzle on the internet).