*Navigating through fractals, exploring their recursive unpredictability to create more finite prototypes is like walking through the forest and noticing a beautiful flower to design your next building – it helps to let go of a fully top-down approach to architecture, it encourages a collaborations with your computer and a deep understanding of machines and materials. It anticipates a world in which the computers will have an intelligence of their own, where the architect will guide it onto a learning path instead of giving him instructions. Using infinite fractals to inspire designs helps instill infinity within the finite world – bringing a spiritual dimension to our everyday life. *

Below is a selection of our students Brief01 journey so far:

]]>

]]>

We are back after a year exploring Symbols & Systems, and an inspiring unit trip to South India, visiting the Hempi Valley and Auroville. This year our focus is on Fractals, not just as forms but as tools to understand how geometry can become infinite and how it can be built within the constraints of the physical reality. Fractals gives the opportunity to expand confined spaces, to let the mind fill the gap that reality had to stop. Therefore it also provides a great tool for the second brief, which is the Tiny Home movement, society’s need to create more compact, efficient homes to face the environmental and economical crisis. As per our previous briefs, we would like our students to build their projects, whether it is a giant fractal at a festival or an actual home within a space that would otherwise be left empty, we want students to raise funds and make, using digital fabrication tools combined with off-the-shelf material. Our goal is to continue training the entrepreneur-makers of tomorrow. Below is a breakdown of our briefs as they are being drafted:

**Studio A4 describing the briefs****Slide Show Unit Presentation**

]]>

In this post, I’m going to try my best to explain the **first, second, and third dimensions**, and why **fractals** don’t belong to any of them, as well as what happens when you get into **higher dimensions**. But before getting into the nitty-gritty of the subject, I think it’s worth prefacing this post with a short note on the nature of mathematics itself:

Alain Badiou said that mathematics is a** rigorous aesthetic**; it tells us nothing of real being, but forges a **fiction of intelligible consistency**. That being said, I think it’s interesting to think about whether or not mathematics were invented or discovered – whether or not numbers exist outside of the human mind.

While I don’t have an answer to this question (and there are at least three different schools of thought on the subject), I do think it’s important to keep in mind that we only use math as **a tool **to measure and represent ‘real world’ things. In other words, our knowledge of **mathematics has its limitations** as far as understanding the space-time continuum goes.

In physics and mathematics, dimensions are used to define the Cartesian plains. The measure of a mathematical space is based on the **number of variables require** to define it. The dimension of an object is defined by **how many coordinates are required** to specify a point on it.

It’s important to note that there is no ‘first’ or ‘second’ dimension. It’s a bit like pouring three cups of water into a vase and asking someone which cup is the first one. The question doesn’t even make sense.

We usually arbitrarily pick a dimension and calling it the ‘first’ one.

Something of zero dimensions give us **a point**. While a point can inhabit (and be defined in) higher dimensions, the point itself has a dimension of zero; you cannot move anywhere on a point.

A line or a curve gives us a one-dimensional object, and is **typically bound by two zero-dimensional things**.

Only **one coordinate** is required to define a point on the curve.

Similarly to the point, a curve can inhabit higher dimension (i.e. you can plot a curve in three dimensions), but as an object, it only possesses one dimension.

Another way to think about it is: if you were to walk along this curve, you could only go forwards or backward – **you’d only have access to one dimension**, even though you’d be technically moving through three dimensions.

Surfaces or plains gives us two-dimensional shapes, and are** typically bound by one-dimensional shapes **(lines/curves).

A plain can be defined by ** x**&

A surface can live in three+ dimensions, but still only possesses two dimension. **Two coordinate** are required to define a point on a surface. For example a sphere is a three-dimensional object, but the surface of a sphere is two-dimensional – a point can be defined on the surface of a sphere with latitude and longitude.

A volume gives us a three-dimensional shape, and **can be bound by two-dimensional shapes **(surfaces).

Shapes in three dimensions are most commonly represented in relation to an **x**, **y** and **z** axis. If a person were to swim in a body of water, their position could be defined by no less than **three coordinates** – their latitude, longitude and depth. Traveling through this body of water grants access to three dimensions.

Fractals can be generally classified as **shapes with a non-integer dimension **(a dimension** **that is not a whole number). They may or may not be self-similar, but are typically measured by their properties at different scales.

Felix Hausdorff and Abram Besicovitch demonstrated that, though a line has a dimension of one and a square a dimension of two, **many curves fit in-between dimensions** due to the varying amounts of information they contain. These **dimensions between whole numbers **are known as Hausdorff-Besicovitch dimensions.

A line or a curve gives us a one-dimensional object that allows us to move forwards and backwards, where only **one coordinate** is required to define a point on them.

Surfaces give us two-dimensional shapes, where **two coordinate** are required to define a point on them.

Here is a shape that cannot be classified as a one-dimensional shape, or a two-dimensional shape. It can be plotted in two dimensions, or even three dimensions, but the object itself **does not have access the two whole dimensions**.

If you were to walk along the shape starting from the base, you could go forwards and backwards, but suddenly you have an option that’s more than forwards and backwards, but less than left and right.

You cannot define a point on this shape with a single coordinate, and a two coordinate system would define a point off of the shape more often than not.

Each fractal has a unique dimensional measure based on how much space they fill.

The same logic applies when exploring fractals plotted in three dimensions:

**two coordinate** are required to define a point on them.

A volume gives us a three-dimensional shape where a point could be defined by no less than **three coordinates**.

While these models live in three dimensions, they do not quite have access to all of them. You cannot define a point on them with two coordinates: they are **more than a surface and less than a volume**.

The Menger Sponge for example has (mathematically) a volume of zero, but an infinite surface area.

The following are three methods of calculating Hausdorff-Besicovitch dimension:

• The exactly self-similar method for calculating dimensions of mathematically generated repeating patterns.

• The Richardson method for calculating a dimensional slope.

• The box-counting method for determining the ratios of a fractal’s area or volume.

In theory, higher (non-integer) dimensional fractals are possible.

As far as I’m concerned however, they’re not particularly good for anything in a three-dimensional world. You are more than welcome to prove me wrong though.

Sadly, living in a three-dimensional world makes it especially difficult to think about, and **nearly impossible to visualise, higher dimensions**. This is in the same way that a two-dimensional being would find it impossibly hard to think about our three-dimensional world, a subject explored in the novel ‘*Flatland’* by Edwin A. Abbott.

That being said, it’s plausible that we experience much higher dimensions that are just **too hard to perceive**. For example, an ant walking along the surface of a sphere will only ever perceive two dimensions, but is moving through three dimensions, and is subject to the fourth (temporal) dimension.

If we consider time an additional variable, then despite the fact that we live in a three dimensional world, we are always subject to (even if we cannot visualize) a fourth dimension.

Neil deGrasse Tyson puts it quite plainly by saying:

“[…]** you have never met someone at a place, unless it was at a time; you have never met someone at a time, unless it was at a place **[…]”

Suppose we call our first three dimensions *x*, *y* & **z**, and our fourth** t**:** **latitude, longitude, altitude and time, respectively. In this instance, **time is linear**, and time & space are one. As if the universe is a kind of film, where going forwards and backwards in time will always yield the exact same outcome; no matter how many times you return to a point in point time, you will always find yourself (and everything else) in the exact same place.

However time is only linear for us as three-dimensional beings. For a four-dimensional being, **time is something that can be moved through as freely** as swimming or walking.

If we explore **spacial dimensions**, a four-dimensional object may be achieved by ‘folding’ three-dimensional objects together. They cannot exist in our three-dimensional world, but there are tricks to visualise them.

We know that we can construct a cube by folding a series of two-dimensional surfaces together, but this is only possible with the third dimension, which we have access to.

If we visualise, in two dimensions, a cube rotating (as seen above), it looks like each surface is distorting, growing and shrinking, and is passing through the other. However we are familiar enough with the cube as a shape to know that this is simply **a trick of perspective** – that objects only* look* smaller when they are farther away.

In the same way that a cube is made of six squares, a four-dimensional cube (hypercube or tesseract), is made of eight cubes.

- A line is bound by two zero-dimensional things
- A square is bound by four one-dimensional shapes
- A cube is bound by six two-dimensional surfaces
- A hypercube, bound by eight three-dimensional volumes

It looks like each cube is distorting, growing and shrinking, and passing through the other. This is because **we can only represent eight cubes folding together** in the fourth dimension with three-dimensional perspective animation.

Perspective makes it *look* like the cubes are growing and shrinking, when** they are simply getting closer and further in four-dimensional space**. If somehow we could access this higher dimension, we would see these cubes fold together unharmed the same way forming a cube leaves each square unharmed.

Below is a three-dimensional perspective view of hypercube rotating in four dimensions, where (in four-dimensional space) all eight cubes are always the same, but are being subjected to perspective.

On the temporal side of things, adding the ability to move ‘left & right’ and ‘up & down’ in time gives us the fifth and sixth dimensions.

(For example: ** x, y, z, t_{1}, t_{2}, t_{3}**)

This is a space where one can move through time based on probability and permutations of what could have been, is, was, or will be on **alternate timelines**. For any one point in this space, there are **six coordinates** that describe its position.

In spacial dimensions, it is theoretically possible to fold four-dimensional objects with a fifth dimension. However, **it becomes increasingly difficult for us to visualise** what is happening to the shapes that we’re folding.

In theory, objects can keep being folded together into higher and higher spacial dimensions indefinitely. (*R*_{1}, R_{2}, R_{3},R_{4},R_{5}, R_{6}, R_{7 }etc.)

There’s a terrific explanation of what happens to platonic solids and regular polytopes in higher dimensions on Numberphile: https://youtu.be/2s4TqVAbfz4

If we can take a point and move it through space and time, including all the futures and pasts possible, for that point, we can then move along a number line where **the laws of gravity are different, the speed of light has changed**.

Dimensions seven though ten are **different universes** with different possibilities, and impossibilities, and even different laws of physics. These grasp all the possibilities and permutations of how each universe operates, and the whole of reality with all the permutations they’re in, throughout all of time and space. The highest dimension is the encompassment of all of those universes, possibilities, choices, times, places all into a single ‘thing.’

These ten time-space dimensions belong to something called **Super-string Theory**, which is what physicists are using to help us understand how the universe works.

There may very well be a link between temporal dimensions and spacial dimensions. For all I know, they are actually the same thing, but thinking about it for too long makes my head hurt. If the topic interests you, there is a philosophical approach to the nature of time called ‘*eternalism’*, where one may find answers to these questions. Other dimensional models include M-Theory, which suggests there are eleven dimensions.

While we don’t have experimental or observational evidence to confirm whether or not any of these additional dimensions really exist, theoretical physicists continue to use these studies to help us learn more about how the universe works. Like how gravity affects time, or the higher dimensions affect quantum theory.

]]>

What makes this book particularly enjoyable to flip through is an abundance of beautiful hand drawings and diagrams. Sir Theodore Andrea Cook explores, in great detail, the nature of spirals in the structure of plants, animals, physiology, the periodic table, galaxies etc. – from tusks, to rare seashells, to exquisite architecture.

He writes, “*a staircase whose form and construction so vividly recalled a natural growth would, it appeared to me, be more probably the work of a man to whom biology and architecture were equally familiar than that of a builder of less wide attainments. It would, in fact, be likely that the design had come from some great artist and architect who had studied Nature for the sake of his art, and had deeply investigated the secrets of the one in order to employ them as the principles of the other.*”

Cook especially believes in a hands-on approach, as oppose to mathematic nation or scientific nomenclature – seeing and drawing curves is far more revealing than formulas.

“*because I believe very strongly that if a man can make a thing and see what he has made, he will understand it much better than if he read a score of books about it or studied a hundred diagrams and formulae. And I have pursued this method here, in defiance of all modern mathematical technicalities, because my main object is not mathematics, but the growth of natural objects and the beauty (either in Nature or in art) which is inherent in vitality.*”

Despite this, it is clear that Theodore Cook has a deep love of mathematics. He describes it at the beautifully precise instrument that allows humans to satisfy their need to catalog, label and define the innumerable facts of life. This ultimately leads him into profoundly fascinating investigations into the geometry of the natural world.

*“An organism is so complex a thing, and growth so complex a phenomenon, that for growth to be so uniform and constant in all the parts as to keep the whole shape unchanged would indeed be an unlikely and an unusual circumstance. Rates vary, proportions change, and the whole configuration alters accordingly.” **– D’Arcy Wentworth Thompson*

D’Arcy Wentworth Thompson wrote, on an extensive level, why living things and physical phenomena take the form that they do. By analysing mathematical and physical aspects of biological processes, he expresses correlations between biological forms and mechanical phenomena.

He puts emphasis on the roles of physical laws and mechanics as the fundamental determinants of form and structure of living organisms. D’Arcy describes how certain patterns of growth conform to the golden ratio, the Fibonacci sequence, as well as mathematics principles described by Vitruvius, Da Vinci, Dürer, Plato, Pythagoras, Archimedes, and more.

While his work does not reject natural selection, it holds ‘survival of the fittest’ as secondary to the origin of biological form. The shape of any structure is, to a large degree, imposed by what materials are used, and how. A simple analogy would be looking at it in terms of architects and engineers. They cannot create any shape building they want, they are confined by physical limits of the properties of the materials they use. The same is true to any living organism; the limits of what is possible are set by the laws of physics, and there can be no exception.

*“You could look at nature as being like a catalogue of products, and all of those have benefited from a 3.8 billion year research and development period. And given that level of investment, it makes sense to use it.” – Michael Pawlyn*

Michael Pawlyn, one of the leading advocates of biomimicry, describes nature as being a kind of source-book that will help facilitate our transition from the industrial age to the ecological age of mankind. He distinguishes three major aspects of the built environment that benefit from studying biological organisms:

The first being the quantity on resources that use, the second being the type of energy we consume and the third being how effectively we are using the energy that we are consuming.

Exemplary use of materials could often be seen in plants, as they use a minimal amount of material to create relatively large structures with high surface to material ratios. As observed by Julian Vincent, a professor in Biomimetics, “materials are expensive and shape is cheap” as opposed to technology where the inverse is often true.

Plants, and other organisms, are well know to use double curves, ribs, folding, vaulting, inflation, as well as a plethora of other techniques to create forms that demonstrate incredible efficiency.

]]>

Along with a team of fellow Architecture students, engineers, lighting technicians and Burning Man enthusiasts based in the UK and USA, Eleanor will be travelling to Black Rock City to share her design with fellow Burners in August this summer.

Celestial Field celebrates the sun, seeking to playfully replicate the ritualistic worship of solar rays and the resulting magnetic fields, combining both science and enchantment.

A sea of swaying rods made from mirrored tubes mounted on springs form an undulating field, rising high above your head, and falling like the plasma pulled in all directions by the phenomenal magnetic forces found on our sun. By day, a field of mirrors intensify the suns natural beauty. Creating a maze of ever changing light to explore and push through, forging your own paths through the densest areas of Celestial Field, parting rods like magnets repelling polarised iron.

For a chance to help Eleanor and her team build this wonderful and inspiring installation this year, please consider donating towards their crowdfunding page on Kickstarter. There are many elegant and unique Celestial Field rewards available, this is a great opportunity to be part of the Celestial Field journey and any support is very much appreciated!

For more information about the concept behind the project, please take a look at Eleanor’s original blog post here on We Want to Learn.

The whole team are incredibly excited about their Burning Man journey and look forward to sharing their experiences with you all. Hope to see you on the Playa!

]]>

Martian dry ice already exists close to its “sublimation point” – the temperature at which it turns directly from solid to gas. It therefore only takes a relatively small nudge for dry ice to change states. One of my aims is to propose harnessing the energy released by this change to power a heat engine – or even a whole colony.

Carbon dioxide plays a similar role on Mars to water on Earth. It is a widely available resource which undergoes cyclic phase changes under the natural Martian temperature variations.

Power stations on Mars will exploit all this frozen CO2 to harvest the energy from the sublimation phase change as dry-ice blocks evaporate, or to channel the chemical energy extracted from other carbon-based sources, such as methane gas.

Solar Panels or Solar Concentrator Parabolic dish would be used to harness this heat and direct towards the metal plates

The experiment I conducted below represents the Leidenfrost Phenomena with water.

]]>

Ants live in colonies consisting of millions of individuals. They don’t have leaders. Although there is the queen ant, she doesn’t tell the other ants what to do. Every ant knows their own roles and carries out their tasks faithfully. They are able to work together effectively because they all have the same goal for the good and unity of the colony.

In an ant colony, different ants have different team roles. There are the worker ants, drones and queen ants. Amongst the worker ants, there are workers of different sizes. The larger ants have stronger mandibles which are more effective for fighting. These are also known as soldier ants, although most of the time they will do the work of a worker ant. Meanwhile, the smaller ants are in charge of taking care of the young.

Below is an example of the ant algorithm in which they adopt a strategy for applying the shortest path technique. As a result, ants act as agents, developing an extremely intelligent network for collecting food and resources. They apply this same knowledge and behavior towards their colonies which creates an extremely **efficient and adaptable city**.

ACA – Ant Colony Algorythm

]]>

Born in Turin, Soleri studied architecture at the Polytechnic University of Turin in 1946 where he received a doctorate with highest honors. After, he moved to the United States, he was an apprentice to Frank Lloyd Wright for a year and a half in Arizona.

In 1950 Soleri returned to Italy with his wife where he was commissioned to build Ceramica Artistica Solimene; a ceramics factory in Vietri. He adapted the ceramic industry processes learned to use in his designs and production of windbells and siltcast architectural structures.

Although Soleri designed and built homes and bridges, as time went on he turned his attention increasingly to his “arcologies”, which conceptually addresses the interrelationship between architecture and ecology. Soleri complied 30 arcologies in his book, *Arcology: The City in the Image of the Man (1969)*. This featured intricately-rendered cities of the future where people would live, work and play in harmonious self-sufficiency. Arcologies are self-contained, vertically layered megabuildings that combined living, working and natural environments into condensed superorganisms.

Soleri called for a *“highly integrated and compact three-dimensional urban form that is the opposite of urban sprawl with its inherently wasteful consumption of land, energy and time tending to isolate people from each other and the community”.*

Putting his ideas into motion, Soleri bought land overlooking the Agua Fria River, 70 miles north of Phoenix. This was the start of Arcosanti. Soleri spent most of his career trying to build an eco-Utopia in the desert planned for 5,000 people in 1970. His vision was originally designed to be 20 stories high which supported a study center for experimental workshops and performing arts. The construction was assisted by student volunteers from all over the world to help provide a model demonstrating Soleri’s concept of Arcology.

Arcosanti struggled to attract residents, reaching a peak population of about 200 in the mid-1970s. There are fewer than 60 permanent residents of the town, but thousands of students and tourists still arrive at Soleri’s “urban laboratory” each year to learn more about the architect’s ideas and methods.

He retired from the project in 2011, leaving the continuation of Arcosanti to Jeff Stein, an architect from Boston. Soleri then passed away two years later. As an architect, urban designer, artist, craftsman, and philosopher, Soleri has influenced many in search of a new paradigm for our built environment.

]]>

13:40

We set of on our Journey, boarding the plane at Heathrow with a brief stop over in Dubai and then eventually land in Chennai

We have arrived!!!!

2 Hour coach journey to our first location

- International Zone
- Residential Zone
- Peace Area
- Cultural Zone
- Matrimandir
- Industrial Zone
- Green Belt

Early Morning Wake Up

We travel back to Chennai to catch our overnight Train

3rd February – Day 06

Enjoying our first day in Hampi

Chennai for our Last day in India

Flight Home

]]>