'Concept' in Architecture

[usarender]

Yes, now your reasoning is coming together and you are beginning to see the light revealed in the energy of thought, which translates itself into the Linguistics of architectural thought.

Language is at the core of sensible imagination. If we can create a code of language, we in essence can create a world. Take the example of a writer of the series of fantasy stories. He creates a new language, a new code and thus creates a universe of thought that leads to concrete form.

If we brake this down into it's relationship to science, we end up with -->>

1. Pre-existing eternal mystery, ultimate sublime pre-existing thought, the order of the universe, the pre-existing eternal force. This is contained in an intelligent spiritual being. This leads to -->>

2. Reason, thought, logic. This logic creates "LANGUAGE"

3. LANGUAGE gives birth to energy, which gives birth to encoding of energy into FORM.

4. This form produces a substance of a SHAPE.

5. This shape can be described as a language of codes that gave birth to this shape.

So all the other elements fall somewhere in the spectrum.

We have all the building blocks in the universe.

An intelligent being - related to THOUGHT, LANGUAGE, ENERGY, FORM

Thought - gives birth to LANGUAGE. Language creates energy -->>

Energy - the building block of time and matter.

Time - a equation of the motion of energy.

We can see light is actually a form of energy.

So if we have E=MC2

Energy equals Mass times the speed of light square.

We are in essence saying energy equals mass times the time it takes energy to transverse space, which is the building block of mass.

It would be better to say

Energy = Mass x the time it takes for energy to transverse the space between the eternal and the spatial limitation of it's containment.

E = M(TimeofTransversalOverContainedSpace).

or

E = M (T of transversal of the energy over the limited space)

Thus, when we release atomic energy, our energy will be a function of the limited mass in relation to the time of transversal of this mass over space until it transforms itself completely into energy).

Thus, energy is in a sense eternal if mass is present in some form.

Without energy we do not have time.

Time is due to the movement of energy in space.

So in essence we have

Time = energy times speed of the speed of light divided by the Mass of the Universe

T = Ex(C/M)

Or, the speed of light distributed over the mass of the universe produces time.

So, from this, we have -->>

Ex(C/M) = T

We know the speed of light is almost infinite. Mass is finite. Energy is finite. So in this equation, only time is infinite, as long as mass and energy are present. When mass and energy cease, time would cease. But in reality, energy never ceases, so therefore time never ceases. It only re-constitutes itself into matter. Thus, we have found a relationship between time, energy and God. All these 3 seem eternal. God is before time, he is before energy, he is eternal and gave birth to energy and time, under this model.

So we can see if we have Time, combined with Energy, we have an almost infinite speed in which this energy can transpose itself over the mass that contains it.

Time is possible by this movement of energy.

So we must create a new formula -->>

E =

T
_______
C/M

Matter - an equation of the motion of energy and time.

Reformulated, we have

E = TM/C

In this formulation, time is an almost infinitely large number. It is a universal constant. It is a measure of the rate engergy released from a mass transposes or distributes itself over space when the mass reaches the velocity of light.

It can be expressed as T = EC/M
The greater the Mass, the greater the energy released. The division of Energy to mass will always produce a constant value, as energy or mass moves at the speed of light.

Thus, if we can change the energy state of a mass, we can alter the universal constant of time! Voyla !

We have reached a new discovery !

Similar to Einsteins formulation, we could alter his formula and invert the value C, if we consider T to be a universal constant almost equal to the speed of light to read -->>

Thus, we have another possibility --->>>

or E = TMC
or T = E/MC
or C = E/TM

Thus a temporal distortion of time can be created by changing the energy state of matter or by changing the mass as contained in a fix energy body. So if we can keep the energy in the body constant and change is mass, we can alter time or the perception of time. If we alter this value T for a universal constant U, we end up with -->>>

or E=UMC

where U = Universal force of equilibrium as defined by energy in movement. Almost equal in value to the speed of light.


Where E = Energy
T= Time
C = Speed of light
M = Mass

In this equation, energy is equal to Time( almost unlimited) divided by the speed of light(almost unlimited), distributed over a mass.

If we have two infinite numbers divided by each other, the greater infinite number will win.

All these elements in the equation must either be finite, or some are infinite.

We cannot say time is unlimited, as it is related to energy being distributed over mass. But it can be a universal constant of nearly unlimited value.

Mass and energy are not unlimited. Only the creative force is unlimited.

So in essence, which is greater in infinite value, time or the speed of light ?

At first glance, we cannot know. Time could be greater. If time is greater then the speed of light distributed over a mass, then we can see we have energy not simply canceling two elements in the equation. We can see that if time and the speed of light were equal, they would cancel themselves. But if we have time being a greater value then the speed of light, then we have as a result, an incredible amount of Energy being released when we allow an a limited mass, to transpose itself over time within the speed of light. In essence, when mass reaches the speed of light, it des-integrates into energy. This proves the equation, as we have in effect 1 = 1 on both sides !

This equation goes to show, further, that the mass in the universe is infinitely small in relation to the energy and time it contains ! We can brake the formula apart and end up with

M =
C/T(E)

Where M= Mass of the Universe
C = speed of light
T = Time - an infinite number
E= a Finite number

We know the element Time is infinite. So if we divide a limited number, the SPEED of light by TIME times the ENERGY of the universe, we end up with a very small number ! Thus most of the universe is made up of MUCH energy and LITTLE Mass !

We know this to be the case, as the majority of the atom is energy and not mass. Mass in essence is only a materialization of energy in predictable, concentrated pockets of energy in space that are in movement and thus create a framework for time. This energy exist from the atomic level up in cycles of movement. These cycles of movement generate a stable pocket of energy. To release energy in matter, one must disrupt the pocket of energy in movement, held together by gluons. The gluon force is so incredibly strong, that only extreme atomic dis-stabilization can disrupt the balance of the pockets of energy.

Thus, we could say energy, when slowed down into cycles, produces time and matter !

We thus have the new building blocks and formula for the constitution of the universe ! So E=MC2 cannot be taken as an inflexible rule.

We have, in essence, re-discovered the codes of the universe.

Then one can't re-invent the wheel ?

Mr. Nelson

Project Liquid Universe Coordinator

http://www.globaldeveloper.net/

Inventor, Architect, Artist, Scientist, Writer, Poet, Mechanic, Musician, Philosopher, Researcher.

"The theory of Gravitational Kinnetics of Motion".

"Terrestrial Transportation System X".

"The Gravitational Cancellation Theory".

"Energy States and Their Relation to Renewable Energy".

"The Model of an Atom as a Source of Renewable Energy"

"Magnetic Cancellation Theory".

"A Blue-Print For the Computer of the Future"

"The New Internet and Data Transmission System"

"The New Global Connectivity Platform"

Scientific theory with a universe of possibilities in mind.

Our greatest strength is not in our individuality of effort, but in our unity of ideas, global connectivity and force of mass collaboration.

[JingYao]

The last part seems there is alot to digest to me, but i do understand you logic. Deriving it to a such conclusion and understanding it there seem to be a bit of gap.

However, i do agree with language is the core of sensible imagination, Little Prince of Saint-Exupery is a great example.

Lets call what we all have expressed as the spectrum of the world, from the most folder to most unfolded and architecture seem to be effected with everything that has to do with the world.

Now, at any moment there is a lot of information to work with, and an architect is limited with time, since a world of information implies an infinity possibility. I don't think it is practically aways approach an design from the most foldered, from the equation of the universe.

I guess a conceptual process requires a start, where would it be the point to start? In a essense i maybe asking where is the best point for localised creation?

[csintexas]

When you asked the students to create a chair they designed chairs, when you asked them to design a place to sit on they assumed you did not want a chair or you would have asked for one. I think they assumed the most literal interpretation each time.

You would need to ask the question very carefully so as to not lead.

What if you where to say:
"Architects can create things like buildings, furniture, spaces and other objects and places which we use in our world.

I need something but I don't know what it is. All I know is that I am not sleepy, hungry or energetic and I don't want to have to stand up all the time.

Now you all design that for me."

Then what kind of diversity would you see?

[usarender]

We have devised a new LANGUAGE for the constitution of the universe, and you are only concerned with concept as relevant to architecture ?

This goes to show our thinking can often be contained in a box and it is difficult to brake away from this box type of thinking.

We have established that the issue of CONCEPT goes much beyond, it delves into LANGUAGE, CREATIVE FORCE, ENERGY and all related areas as cited.

So if one can come up with a new way to describe the scientific constitution of time and matter, we have individuals still going around in circles speculating on whether this type of thinking has a connection, any value or relevance to the world we live in, and more specifically to architecture or the formation of a concept.

This only goes to show that in these communities, it is common for designers and individuals to continue in the same patterns of thinking without being to see something REVOLUTIONARY even when it is in front of their eyes.

We go on to assume we can fit all our thinking into a BOX and ignore the greatest developments of architectural theory, of defining thought and the relationship between the various fields, as expounded upon.

Even if Einstein were here himself, the indifference, doubt, questioning, joking, sarcasm, and lack of serious consideration would continue.

This goes to show that in these communities, revolutionary ways of viewing our universe are not taken seriously.

What if this is right ? The world has then just witnessed an event in the magnitude of Universal Explosion of Energy.

It being recorded here will only further reveal the validity or lack of validity of our arguments and way of thinking, once this becomes universally accepted.

So I would measure carefully any response, in view of the fact that one could be, so to speak, witnessing a phenomenal project with a passive indifference.

[csintexas]

Are we reading the same thread?

[JingYao]

hmmm that's interesting.

Thanks for pointing it out, I do seems to be confined my box type thinking which i always thought i could see it from outside. It seems one cannot really split consciousness and concentrate on a subject at the same time, at least in my case.

As regards to the scientific equations, i said it seems there is much to digest, meaning, I can only understand your logic or your equation, but cannot varify how some terms gets associated with.

I am not sure about...

3. LANGUAGE gives birth to energy, which gives birth to encoding of energy into FORM.

and

Energy - the building block of time and matter.

Are they the same energy in the same context?

[usarender]

Language giving birth to energy can be seen in the example of a writer, using language, to give birth to the energy the language creates, in forming in the mind of a reader a new universe of thought, and in the resulting post author productions of movies. One could argue the energy of our mind produces the thoughts which in turn thoughts and the resulting energy in the mind of the readers and on into infinity. In reality, the thought process involves a form of energy. It is the flow of energy in the brain that governs the thought processes.

In architecture, our language gives birth to energy in various ways. When we create a vocabulary of architecture, we give birth to ideas, thoughts, mental processes of energy that reflect themselves in our design solutions. So we see the energy expended directly influencing our built environment.

Energy, and the encoding of energy are two separate processes. The encoding of energy can be seen in the encoding of language. In the mental arena, and in the formation of language, energy is expended. Thus in this case, energy produces the LANGUAGE, WHICH PRODUCES THE CONCEPT, WHICH PRODUCES THE FORM, WHICH PRODUCES THE CODE. The encoding of energy can take a physical form, a mental metaphysical shape or be encoded in matter itself. In the atom, energy is encoded in the structure itself. If one can de-code and brake down this structure, one can release this energy. So this suggests there can be many ways to liberate this energy, we only need to discover the true code of the atom. We need to understand how it works, how it generates energy, and it's fundamental building blocks which are infinitely smaller then a neutron, positron or electron.

It could be argued here we are a laboratory of discussion to discover the true codes of architecture.

In the creation of the universe, LOGUS gave birth to energy and light. LOGUS, as the LANGUAGE is the creative forces that produces the cosmic energy. In the sequence, it gives birth to LIGHT, which gives birth to MATTER, which then gives birth to THE ELEMENTS, which then give birth to GENETIC ENCODING and on....

Energy is the building block of time and matter in these equations. You would need to understand the science behind the equations to grasp this. Time and matter only exist within the framework of energy in movement. Without energy, time and matter would cease to exist.

[csintexas]

I think we tend to train kids to not be creative, some cultures more than Americans I have heard but I don't know.

[usarender]

Your expression "localized creation" is a nice one. It expresses well the idea that a concept must fit into a context to maintain relevance to the problem at hand. It also expresses the idea that an architectural endeavor is a localized application of the process of the creation of thought as governed by the LINGUISTICS of the application.

[JingYao]

How you unite the energy in the mind that creates language with energy external of the mind in the cosmos is interesting.

If i am being a practical person, I would ask how can such infinitely minimum energy compared to the cosmos would achieve a large effect?

How do you find two theories, one being scientifical equations as E=Mc2 related to LOGUS, seems a little mysterious. If i understand correctly, it is of two opposing side, one being darwining and the other creationist, which i find it hard to comprehend. I would like excuse myself for lack of knowledge in this field, but i still find it very interesting.

[JingYao]

My expression of "localised creation" also refers to creation of a concept in architecture, where i think it is the action of drawing all energies and referential meanings, establing itself as a new concept, it is the point where an architect receives an insight where he perceives a new order which harmonises all parameters of its local context which must be understood with universal context.

As how i have express it, context is universal, local context is the parameters that is immediate to the project, however i think an architect would be a little short sighted if he only consider the context in front of him. As much as in formation of any scientific theory, an scientist uses the minmum amount of sample to predict the universe at large. An intricate order of the universe contained in an any size sample could enfold and gives us the universe.

[usarender]

Your expression "localized creation" is a nice one. It expresses well the idea that a concept must fit into a context to maintain relevance to the problem at hand. It also expresses the idea that an architectural endeavor is a localized application of the process of the creation of thought as governed by the LINGUISTICS of the application.

With regards to your comment on LOGUS Einstein found this same relationship as he believed in the pre-existing intelligence. It is contained in the LINGUISTICS.

There are those who believe in modified forms of Darwinism as well as Scientific Creationalism. There can be an inter-mixing of these concepts.

Your statement -->>

"where an architect receives an insight where he perceives a new order which harmonises all parameters of its local context which must be understood with universal context."

Is an interesting one. It brings up the idea of a new order as expressed in a concept that is able to harmonize all the parameters of the local context within the greater universal context of the problem at hand. So you have applied well the principles of this discussion as relevant to concept.

And as you state -->>>

" An intricate order of the universe contained in an any size sample could enfold and gives us the universe. "

This expresses well how the LANGUAGE of architecture, which can contain a small scale version of a greater order in a small size sample, can give us a universe of architectural ideas, and translate itself to the built environment in a never ending sequences of orders, forms and shapes. It can convey a meaning to inspire generations to come.

[P.C.]

For me things don't need to join in a bigger perspective --- it is already difficult to emagine what important changes would occour, when houses are build at a third the cost four times stronger.
My agenda are to change the world already, change the production of things by a new way to put things together, and just that, render so difficult pictures of the future , that I rather stay with my primitive arguments about providing that platform, to develob those new technikes so we can build these nice new houses. If an artist shuld cover more than that, I think it is to great a challance, ---- new thinking and innovation are already challancing enough, the implications of these new options almost more than I can emagine, and Realy I find it more than what I am commited to.

[usarender]

To develop a participative platform for the exchange of ideas, this is what this is all about, and what we are all about at Project Liquid Universe. Innovation and change always bring surprise and further complexity to the traditional ways of doing things. This is why those in these forums who are proposing alternate ways of thinking, alternate technologies, alternate architectural theory are viewed with skepticism and hesitation. To apply a new universe of possibilities may frighten the timid, may surprise the traditional way of thinking, may undermine our comfort zone. It is when we begin to brake away from our box type thinking that we can together work, exchange ideas, develop new ways of thinking and embrace each individual proposition with an open mind. It is when we simply refuse to open our mind and instead focus on what we know, have, or the known way we do things that we are not able to envision a new universe and way to do things. Each proposal has it's strengths and weaknesses. If we analyze these with an open empirical mind, we will be served well. If we simply shun the challenge, we will never know the world of opportunities at our door step.

[alexneverhurts]

USARender,

Finally, here comes something in my field. (I was a college student of optical telecommunication, dealing with theories modern optics all day; and now a graduate student of semiconductor devices, a field about energy level of nano-scaled quantum particles, like electron and photon.)

Your theory is logically sound, and well played with those high-school level equations. But the problem falls into the same pit as many of similar claims did: to be scientific as you were trying to show with those equations, how can you design certain experiment to prove your theory? Probably you are right with your allegation (though less likely in physics, since at least basic college math like calculus should be involve to scientifically explain any big issue like the truth of universe), but even Einstein himself wasn't valued until his theory was supported by a series of facts obtained through scientific experiments. Though, by the other hand, simulations known as "thought experiments" played a major role in Einstein's Relativity Theories, by assuming several scenarios of experiments while the outcomes are so straightforward to be predicted that real experiments can be avoided. But to be noted that even Einstein need experiments to support his theory, though he's not an experimentalist.