space architecture

Postby FIN » Tue Jan 06, 2004 12:37 pm

while strictly true it doesn't mean they won't advance...we were strictly leaf eating chimps at one stage
FIN
Senior Member
 
Posts: 826
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2001 12:00 am
Location: dublin

Postby PVC King » Tue Jan 06, 2004 12:45 pm

I agree that the human has shown a unique ability to progress.

But I think that some love to mystify computers. They are really quite simple things, they are also getting more user freindly all the time. I loved the dotcom bust particularly watching all the clowns that predicted the end of working in offices etc loosing the money they never really had.

It they who are government artists now while the property bandwagon rumbles on
PVC King
 

Postby FIN » Tue Jan 06, 2004 1:01 pm

the operating system of ur pc is not quite what we are talking about and neither are we saying ur pc will sprout legs and begin to walk.

and joy in another person's misery!!! this is the instinct i was talking about earlier...
FIN
Senior Member
 
Posts: 826
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2001 12:00 am
Location: dublin

Postby PVC King » Tue Jan 06, 2004 1:09 pm

It all works from the same principle the only difference is that the computers you are talking about have much more capacity, more complex programmes containing much higher numbers of viarables in their decision making process.

Talking about walking I would use the analogy of a dog and keep the muzzle firmly in place
PVC King
 

Postby FIN » Tue Jan 06, 2004 1:17 pm

Originally posted by Diaspora
Talking about walking I would use the analogy of a dog and keep the muzzle firmly in place



ha,ha..what! what age r u? 12!

anyway...back to the topic. it is a possibility in years to come. we have seen how far computers have progressed in the last fifty years. and they are far from simple as u first said. they are indeed complex. and as we begin to rely on them more and more they will become even more so. computers may be the first colonists onto a new planet and therefore this is what we have to think about.
FIN
Senior Member
 
Posts: 826
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2001 12:00 am
Location: dublin

Postby FIN » Tue Jan 06, 2004 1:21 pm

Originally posted by Diaspora
The Falklands war was fought for mineral rights, namely the oil rights to about half the South Atlantic.

Your are also right in saying the 32 storey building is insignificant, it is insignificant in architectural terms. Dublin is being sold a pup

Name one 25 storey plus rendered landmark building that is held as a model of good design

As for AI

it is limited because like some people in Ireland it never learns from it's mistakes i.e. sub standard tall residential development undertaken by government


sorry just after seeing this... what oil rights? u aren't listening to the propaganda r u?
indeed a pup...should be a lot taller.
FIN
Senior Member
 
Posts: 826
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2001 12:00 am
Location: dublin

Postby PVC King » Tue Jan 06, 2004 1:25 pm

In about 500 years possibly technologies will exist to send out missions with retreival capabilities

It all comes back to risk and reward there has been nothing found in space that merits colonisation.

Space is just that a big empty void that throws the odd meteorite scare at the earth sporadically.

Resources should be directed at two aspects of space, the sun and the harnessing of solor energy and the moon the harnessing of tidal energy. Other expenditure is simply indulging the whims of a particular scientific elite

And that takes no artificial intellegence
PVC King
 

Postby FIN » Tue Jan 06, 2004 1:34 pm

oh! dear ... how small minded...
of course architectural conservation is indulging the whims of the particular failed designer elite.

to look forward instead of backwards may seem a waste of money to you but for a lot of people to search for better than we have got is a noble profession.
FIN
Senior Member
 
Posts: 826
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2001 12:00 am
Location: dublin

Postby PVC King » Tue Jan 06, 2004 1:59 pm

Fin Quote " what oil rights? u aren't listening to the propaganda r u?"

Have you ever been to Argentina FIN?

Do you know of a particular regime that murdered 10,000 of it's own citizens. Which was ignored because people were looking at Pinochet in neighbouring Chile.

Thatcher reinvaded because there are substantial Oil reserves off the Falklands and South Georgia.

That is not propaganda but fact.

Fin Quote "indeed a pup...should be a lot taller."

Does that go back to picking up a chunk of Manhatten and dropping it in as per Stira?

What is good about the proposal in Architectural terms?

You are a height merchant it would appear, design is secondary to height.
PVC King
 

Postby what? » Tue Jan 06, 2004 2:08 pm

im continually amazed at the opinions on this website about highrise buildings. there seems to be a strong vein of height lust fuelled by (in my opinion) some sort of insecurity amongst the architectural community here that we dont have any tall buildings in dublin. the reason we dont have tall building is not solely down to overbearing planners. it is because we have never had the economical needs that create high rise buildings.
if you want to solve urban sprawl a much more purtinant issue is the density of suburbia rather than the city centre. the attitude of "lets build a 60 storey skyscraper because we can" in the middle on 2storiesville is a futile self-indulgent excercise
what?
 
Posts: 427
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2003 12:18 pm
Location: Dublin

Postby FIN » Tue Jan 06, 2004 2:23 pm

the oil reserves belong to argentina and not to the falklands. no i haven't been to argentina..have u?? thatcher re-invaded as it was of military importance. and as regards argentina's regime..ever country has had a dicator like that. thatcher herself watched thousands of irish getting killed in the north and technicially they are british citizens. so to clean someone else's house one best have one's own gleaming. however that being neither here nor there as regards to the thraed i will discuss the buildings in the other thread as two conversations about the same thing is not quite what i want.
FIN
Senior Member
 
Posts: 826
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2001 12:00 am
Location: dublin

Postby garethace » Tue Jan 06, 2004 3:24 pm

Originally posted by FIN
ok..that hurt my brain but yes...but is it the intelligence of the machines or it's program.


Yes! Exactly, more and more this stuff will begin to hurt peoples' brains, but what you can glean from this article - something of what a 'chip foundry' as they are called - are actually like.

They are becoming more and more automated, less and less people are involved. It is not a question of whether or not AI will happen, it is simply not up to us - it is just a game of numbers as to when it does happen.

More than likely it will probably happen someplace like on Mars, where humans will not be able to live, but machines will.
garethace
 
Posts: 1579
Joined: Wed May 14, 2003 9:01 pm
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Postby FIN » Tue Jan 06, 2004 3:28 pm

yes. i agree. where the machines will have to be programed to adapt to it's environs and then so given the scope to "grow".
FIN
Senior Member
 
Posts: 826
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2001 12:00 am
Location: dublin

Postby FIN » Tue Jan 06, 2004 3:31 pm

just thinking after i wrote that. the architecture might be able to define the boundaries of the growth of the machine. initally anyway until it can adapt.
FIN
Senior Member
 
Posts: 826
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2001 12:00 am
Location: dublin

Postby garethace » Tue Jan 06, 2004 4:48 pm

Originally posted by FIN
yes. i agree. where the machines will have to be programed to adapt to it's environs and then so given the scope to "grow".


Naw, you have it on backways! :) It works the other way around - the environment always chooses some poor unsuspectiing smuck, at some particular time and place to become the dominant race - how do you think, such arse holes like humans ever managed to get where they are - on their own merit! Huh!

read on, and see what I mean exactly,

>Computers are glorified calculators


What a quote! I will have to remember it.


>I agree that the human has shown a unique ability to progress.


Not necessarily true, they stayed using basic stone tools and without the gift of fire for millions of years. Then for some reason, something just happened suddenly and from no development whatsoever over a very extended period, you abruptly had huge leaps and bounds in their development compressed into quiet a short period of time. My own guess, is that since Dinosaurs were on the way out, nature just picked something else to be the successor - hence human beings stepped into the breach.

It is like re-introducing the wolf back into Yellow Stone National Park - every system needs that vital component in order to function correctly - that component will always be filled by some species. In the case of the wolfs at Yellowstone, they are finding after ten years, they no longer have the same trouble with other species breeding out of control - everything else has stabilised. Of course, farmers are worried about the wolf attacking the cattle etc still, but largely the move has worked out well.

Upright walking and increasing of brain mass all happened in the human species, subsequent to this dramatic beginning in the acceleration of human development. If you like, the environment just happened to choose human beings – the same way as it will someday more than likely just ‘choose’ machines to be our successors. I love the part in the movie by Spielberg, called AI, where a last of the batch, human constructed robot named David I think, remains the only lasting legacy of the human species to the newer and more sophisticated machine species. I think we know very little about Dinosaurs, but they were the dominant species for millions of years of the earth's history.


> the operating system of ur pc is not quite what we are talking about and neither are we
>saying ur pc will sprout legs and begin to walk.


Actually, the only thing that robotics has hightlighted is how complex the actual act of upright walking is. It is something which all human beings instinctively take for granted and learn naturally. It is something our built environments are constructed around. You start hitting all kinds of complexity brick walls and the project to make machines walk around an environment designed for humans ultimately fails. The same as the environment in which Dinosaurs thrived was unsuitable for human habitation and development. However, robots are great for crawling down sewer pipes and places where humans cannot - sending AI bots into our own veins, is another example, going to Mars etc, etc, etc.

Our dependency on robots will grow as time goes on, our privacy will be non-existent. See the movie AI by Spielberg when you get around to it.


>It all works from the same principle the only difference is that the computers you are
>talking about have much more capacity, more complex programmes containing much
>higher numbers of viarables in their decision making process.


Simply not true, everything in a computer/machinery is inherent quite simple - it depends just on modulations of voltage in electricity to make 1 and 0s. Everything has to fit through that same small window - that is why you need a computer chip to work faster and faster - hence the hipe about MHZ. Mind you, as computer chips become smaller and smaller, and you can fit more onto the same piece of cheap, bulk, Si wafer - then sort of AI networks can be simulated very easily. It becomes less and less about speed and MHZ and more to do with AI networking.

SGI and NASA are always combining together thousands, literally thousands of chips to work as a single image of an operating system - then you can really begin to plug in the big questions and get your answers. To reference the article about WiFi - I want to be able to stick my own PDA out of the window of my Taxi, in a downtown traffic jamb and instantly, without being plugged in, it communicates with all the other machines in the vicinity - it draws its power from the Radio waves etc, etc. See how machines could be more adaptable than humans? Unless we can develop mind reading capabilities that is.

I mean, this cross-communication could be really cool on Mars, where whole armies of the buggers would work like in the Star Wars movies - you could use the planet Mars, to have like of Paint Ball gaming on drugs, using cheap useless robots. Of course the robots would eventually just get tired of that an rebel on us! :-)

Do a goggle for things like 'Red Storm'. The next Playstation 3, will be designed a bit like this - a load of little computers stuffed into one chip. As chips become cheaper and cheaper this becomes possible. The trouble with MicroSoft products, is they never seem to be able to 'move' off of the simple PC - even though they were extremely sucessful on that one platform. OSes like Linux have been extremely sucessful on larger clusters of hundreds and thousands of computers though. Strange.

Unlike our own human biological networks, which manage to construct complex arrangements and patterns. When machines begin to intelligently recognise patterns, as in art with humans, maybe then. . . that is mostly what architects are trained to do isn't it? I mean, you know automatically when a young architectural student has suddenly 'transitioned' when the patterns of line weights and patterns they make on a drawing presentation actually begins to communicate a message above the addition of its components and becomes the multiple of its components.

I must be stupid as an Architect, as I failed to 'transition'. I feel at home with computers in this respect. :-) What is crucial to understand from the 'Chip Foundry' article is that each chip 'bakes' itself differently. No two are exactly alike, and machinery does go out of sync by accident, so the odds are, that eventually something strange and errie is going to just happen.

>It all comes back to risk and reward there has been nothing found in space that merits colonisation.
>Resources should be directed at two aspects of space, the sun and the harnessing of
>solor energy and the moon the harnessing of tidal energy. Other expenditure is simply
>indulging the whims of a particular scientific elite

But don't you just love all the pomp and cerimony of it all? I mean imagine trying to make a good Bruce Willis - type action flic about tidal energy! By the way, good post there What?
garethace
 
Posts: 1579
Joined: Wed May 14, 2003 9:01 pm
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Postby PVC King » Tue Jan 06, 2004 5:00 pm

You missed your vocation Gareth you should have gone into chip architecture.

There is also more to life than hype such as rockets and worse Bruce Willis.

So what if they find minerals on Mars it will be a long time before the technology exists to either get it back to Earth or get people or machines out there on an economically viable basis.

The two forms of energy I refered to are both economically viable.

Space architecture, have you considered model making?
PVC King
 

Postby FIN » Tue Jan 06, 2004 5:26 pm

with organic life i will agree with u but if we put machines on mars then we will have to mould them to be able to adapt to that environment rather different than evolving. this however will present the oppurtinuity for them to adapt themselves to their situation. while we won the lotto as regards who takes over we are giving our inheirtance to the machines so in a way we are choosing.
in space there is no need to walk don't know about mars but i assume cos it's generally the same mass as our rock it has similiar gravity!!!
absolutely agree we will be completely dependant on machines...it's not far off it now to be honest. i never took to Ai the film. i have watched it twice now and still don't think much of it but the irony didn't pass me by that he actually strived to be human and then ended up being the only remaining human form left...quite a strange one.
however it still was the form of a human which i presume will be the main target of getting an ai to look like us but i feel they will take a more unusual form. anywhoo.
FIN
Senior Member
 
Posts: 826
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2001 12:00 am
Location: dublin

Postby FIN » Tue Jan 06, 2004 5:42 pm

disapora. the need to go into space and colonise other rocks isn't purely an econimical decision. soon and i mean that we will have too many people on this planet for it to support us and so for survival of many it is important the we breech this. u may equate it with columbus.
FIN
Senior Member
 
Posts: 826
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2001 12:00 am
Location: dublin

Postby PVC King » Tue Jan 06, 2004 5:53 pm

I disagree entirely Columbas wanted to find an alternative route to India to eliminate the taxes the Ottomans were putting on spices.
It made Spain a World Power for a few Centuries.

The Spice Route through Afganistan and Persia it is a trip I would love to do some time.

I am going to leave this thread it is a bit notional for me. As Columbas had the technology to make his trip viable.

The Russians were the first in to space and had the first space station, their economy collapsed.
PVC King
 

Postby garethace » Tue Jan 06, 2004 6:23 pm

The Russians did actually learn one thing from their space travel though, which I don't think the Americans might have grasped quite yet - a la world space station etc, etc.

That people who are left up there in orbit, go absolutely bats mentally.

No getting around that fact - one American tried to spend some time up with the Russians and came down a very broken man indeed.

The right stuff, may not be the right stuff after all.

Aside from the whole physcho thing, the body just disintegrates without the use of muscles and the presence of gravity - you could not have what is depicted in Star Trek period. Even with the exercise and all of that, the Russians still found that muscle mass was just depleting away to nothing!

The muscles on one's face didn't know how to respond to the absence of gravity and that caused all kinds of physical problems.

I would think exploring the sea, might be one positive development to come from all of this space age investment and time though, and that extra knowledge gained about the sea, climatic factors and analysis, might eventually lead to better and more economic use of tidal power in the long run.

So one cannot dismiss the benefits of space travel for solar/wind/wave either. Many of the vessels exploring the underwater currents in the seas now, are space age technology, materials and workmanship - alot of them russian too.
garethace
 
Posts: 1579
Joined: Wed May 14, 2003 9:01 pm
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Postby FIN » Tue Jan 06, 2004 6:24 pm

well maybe we will send someone looking for water on mars and they'll find gold... the point is only good can come from it...mind u we probably won't send a human which is what we were talking about and therefore the consequences of that. but colonies aside it takes a few years at present to get to mars and therefore we will need a spacecraft for humans that will require designing.
FIN
Senior Member
 
Posts: 826
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2001 12:00 am
Location: dublin

Postby FIN » Mon Jan 12, 2004 10:44 am

2030 seemingly is when we first step on mars according to the sunday times..sorry no links yet but will try to get some. with a lunar colony in ten years time.
FIN
Senior Member
 
Posts: 826
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2001 12:00 am
Location: dublin

Postby FIN » Mon Jan 12, 2004 1:15 pm

here is the article. this was in the indo..


US plans to put men on Mars
Saturday January 10th 2004





A colour 'postcard from Mars' . . . American astronauts will return to the Moon in the early part of the next decade as a prelude to sending a manned mission to Mars




THE United States is to establish a permanent manned base on the Moon as a prelude to sending astronauts to Mars, President Bush will announce next week.

Under a sweeping review of the US space programme, American astronauts will return to the Moon in the early part of the next decade, for the first time since the last Apollo landing in 1972.

The blueprint, which President Bush is expected to unveil next Wednesday, will establish a manned mission to Mars as the long-term goal of all American exploration of space, to inject vigour and vision into a programme that has been reeling since the Columbia disaster last February.

A permanent lunar space station is envisaged as a critical stepping stone to Mars, as it would test the technology needed to take astronauts to Mars, to support them on arrival, and get them safely home.

An attempt to land astronauts on Mars might follow within another decade, administration sources said.

The initiative has been widely interpreted as an attempt to provide the President with a 'Kennedy moment' that unites the American people behind a great purpose in an election year.

It has deliberate echoes of President Kennedy's 1961 pledge to put a man on the Moon by the end of that decade, to counter the humiliation of Yuri Gagarin's first flight into space.

Many experts said yesterday that a more appropriate precedent was a speech made by the first President Bush in 1989, on the 20th anniversary of the Apollo 11 Moon landing, which also promised a return to the Moon and a manned flight to Mars.

That project was abandoned after Nasa estimated the cost at $400bn (€312bn). The bill remains just as steep today. Scientists and politicians said it was barely conceivable that the US Congress would approve such spending at a time when it wants to cut the huge budget deficits that are predicted for the next few years.

The International Space Station, which may be retired if a lunar base is built, will cost at least $100bn (€78bn) to complete, and much of any new investment will be eaten up by the development of a replacement for Nasa's ageing shuttle fleet.

Experts are also sceptical that the vast technical and human challenges of sending astronauts to Mars can conceivably be met before 2030 at the earliest.

Douglas Osheroff, a Nobel Prize-winning physicist at Stanford University, who helped to investigate the Columbia disaster, said money would be better spent on cheaper robotic missions, such as the Spirit rover that landed on Mars this week.

"The cost of a manned enclave on the Moon, I think, is going to make the space station look cheap," he said. "That's the only good thing about it. I think we're still 30 years from going to Mars, and if there's any reason to do that, I don't know."

Other scientists are worried that an overriding emphasis on manned missions would divert funds from other Nasa activities, which are more cost-effective and scientifically valuable.

Andrew Coates, of University College, London, said: "My big worry is whether the money for this will be drawn from elsewhere in the Nasa budget. It would be a disaster if this stops robotic missions to explore the rest of the solar system."

Administration officials said President Bush's speech next week was likely to be a broad "mission statement" rather than a detailed set of proposals. The President is expected, however, to ask Congress to increase Nasa's $15bn (€11.7bn) budget by $800m (€623bn) in 2005, and to raise it by five per cent in each of the next five years.

The most probable timetable for flights to the Moon and Mars would see robotic probes and orbiters sent to Mars in 2005, 2007, 2009, and 2011.

Moon landings would begin around 2013, with a permanent base established in the second half of the next decade. The US would then withdraw from the space station project to concentrate on the Moon and Mars.

* Two further attempts to contact the Beagle 2 Mars probe have failed, scientists said last night.

The British craft's mother ship, Mars Express, flew over the landing site at 12.50pm on Thursday and 1.27pm yesterday but heard no signal. (© The Times, London)
FIN
Senior Member
 
Posts: 826
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2001 12:00 am
Location: dublin

Postby FIN » Tue Jan 13, 2004 12:48 pm

i know i am talking to myself but if it helps just one person to start thinking more about this subject and give it some credit instead of thinking it's sci-fi then i'll be happy.

i was watching a programme on discovery science(channel 555 on digital, actually when i am on this subject there are some excellent programmes on discovery civilisation in regards the orgins of civilisation and their architecture) about space colonies(yes i am actually interested in this) about the moon and mars.. they propose to build underground living quaters on the moon with domes over crater marks to introduce trees and such...personally i believe underground is the way to go here as the moon gets hit by meteorites a lot... but i think the most favoured idea about mars is tera-forming, this is where they introduce green house gases into the athmosphere and warm the planet up. this will then after about 100years bring the surface of mars to somewhat livable levels where then plants may grow to produce oxygen and so on...they had some ideas on the architecture of the planet once we start to colonise. is this not an architect's wet dream? a green (red) field site with no planning conditions or restrictions, no messy conservationalists to deal with, basically a blank canvas for one to create what you wouldn't dream about here. this is the fasination of this particular subject.
it's a mixture of architecture, urban planning and science.
FIN
Senior Member
 
Posts: 826
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2001 12:00 am
Location: dublin

Postby roskav » Tue Jan 13, 2004 3:50 pm

Hey Fin .. another thing that would free the design up would be the one third gravity enviornment... someone like lebbeus woods would have a field day..
I bought a book during the eighties which had detailed plans for settling on Ganymede and Callisto ... I think.. very boring book but I liked the ideas. I'll see if I can find it somewhere.
roskav
Member
 
Posts: 215
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2000 1:00 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

PreviousNext

Return to Ireland