Yes Rune. I have not forgotten Stefan Poachmann. He is one of the greats.He is 
the pioneer of P/A/O method. I did not mention his name just because he is 
already using the system and very often explaining it to others. He is not 
using rote memory. That is why he(only one) solved Megaminx blindfolded, FOUR  
3*3*3 cubes BLD. I don't think it is possible with rote memory.
  I am sorry, if it hurts you. 
  John Louis

Rune Wesström <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
  What is P/A/O technique?
(And  maybe you shouldn´t forget mr Pochmann).
R
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "JohnLouis Louis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, March 04, 2006 2:05 PM
Subject: Re: [Speed cubing group] Re: Natural memorisation


You are perfectly correct Joel, in my opinion. I like to clarify one more point 
here. 
  First of all, it is only a beginning. To focus your attention in the initial 
period of learning to memorise a cube you are transforming the information. 
With more practice, slowly you will be able to focus your attention when you 
are memorising without transforming the information. Only experience will tell 
you that. 
  I think some of you like Leyan, Tyson, Macky, David Orser, Jean Pons and 
Chris Hardwick are all able to focus their attention and able to memorise 
without transforming and more importantly able to retain those ABSTRACT, 
INTANGIBLE information until they complete solving the cube. If you have 
already reached that stage, that is good. Still I strongly believe, once you 
master the P/A/O technique, it will be faster than the rote memorising.
   
  Secondly, By applying P/A/O method combined with a journey, you can memorise 
any number of cubes and solve them blindfolded. I don't think it is possible by 
rote memory or atleast P/A/O method will be faster than rote memory. 
  Has anyone using rote memory to memorise the cube, tried multi-cubes 
blindfolded except David Orser ? I don't know which memorisation technique 
David used for his 10 cubes BLD.
   
  John Louis
   

Joël van Noort <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
  Hello Ryan,

That is very good important question! I while ago, I have been 
trying to memorise the corners of the cube visually, and that seemed 
to work fine... I always thought that making up big stories and 
images in your head was something for people that can't memorise 
very well. :). But now I found out that people that memorise a deck 
of cards in under a minute also use techniques like this, and it 
doesn't have to mean you are wasting time at all...

So how can that work? Why is it interesting to transform the 
information into a story with things that don't have anything to do 
with cubing?

Well, as for the method I am trying to learn now, (person, action 
and object method): when you are memorising, you are memorising 
things that the human brain is used to. All your life, you have been 
storing memories with people that you know well, that are doing 
things. That's just what your brain can automatically do. Storing 
images of people doing things in you head is more 'natural' ;) for 
the brain to deal with than a bunch of positions on a cube. That's 
why I think it will be feasable to use this system. (John Louis, am 
I right?).

- Joël.

--- In [email protected], Ryan Heise 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I've been reading the various threads about memorisation, and have 
to
> wonder what is appealing about translating information from one 
domain
> into a completely unrelated domain in order to memorise it.
> 
> We have discussed memorising a cube using numbers, sentences and 
cards.
> Why not memorise the direct visual imagery that we get by looking 
at the
> cube? With training it should be possible to form memory 
associations
> based on the spatial relativity of same-coloured facelets, and 
observe
> shape outlines formed by these sets of facelets. This is how our 
brains
> are natively wired to perform visual analysis, anyway.
> 
> By the way, a sequence of 4 random chords (4 notes each) 
constrained to
> a range of just 2 octaves, contains more data than a single random 
cube
> position (if you only care about the data that allows you to solve 
the
> cube). If you can see visual patterns to the same extent that 
musicians
> hear auditory patterns, then a single random cube shouldn't take 
more
> than a few seconds to memorise.
> 
> Ryan
>






  SPONSORED LINKS 
        Jigsaw puzzle game   Free puzzle inlay games   Educational game and 
puzzle     Word puzzle game   Kid puzzle game   Puzzle games 
    
---------------------------------
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS 

    
    Visit your group "speedsolvingrubikscube" on the web.
    
    To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
    
    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 

    
---------------------------------
  




---------------------------------
Jiyo cricket on Yahoo! India cricket
Yahoo! Messenger Mobile Stay in touch with your buddies all the time.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




Yahoo! Groups Links









  SPONSORED LINKS 
        Jigsaw puzzle game   Free puzzle inlay games   Educational game and 
puzzle     Word puzzle game   Kid puzzle game   Puzzle games 
    
---------------------------------
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS 

    
    Visit your group "speedsolvingrubikscube" on the web.
    
    To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
    
    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 

    
---------------------------------
  



                                
---------------------------------
 Jiyo cricket on Yahoo! India cricket
Yahoo! Messenger Mobile Stay in touch with your buddies all the time.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/speedsolvingrubikscube/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 


Reply via email to