"Christopher K. Egan" wrote in message
om...

2. The second point is one I think I suggested to you a few years
ago....and it is equally important. Architecture is not really about
structures....it is about spaces for humans and their belongings and
their activities. Therefore, the shape of architectural space must be
driven by the human actions instead of by the construction.

At a certain scale I agree with you. But I would argue that at a certain
scale physical dimensions of the space takes precedence, e.g. the dome of St
Peters or the Eifel tower. I just don't believe that the relationship is
one way. Program is not always that important (though it usually is).


Any means
of construction is simply an interesting curiosity unless it forms the
spaces needed by humans. In other words... if the spaces are driven by
the structural system, it is simply an engineering novelty ...not a
work of architecture.

"Syd Mead" wrote in message
news:QbAeb.9058$Rd4.3063@fed1read07...
GS/Don quote: "Edison tried over 1000 materials...." How many has Per
tried? Even at and economical scale?

You're talking apples and oranges.
Per is suggesting a *method*, not a material.

You're talking apples and oranges.
Per is suggesting a *method*, not a material.

Apples and apples. Edison had an idea and tried to implement it. Per found
the "boolean" button in his 3d program, threw some inaccurate adjectives at
it and talks it up like it's cross sliced bread.

"gruhn" wrote in message
...
You're talking apples and oranges.
Per is suggesting a *method*, not a material.

Apples and apples. Edison had an idea and tried to implement it. Per found
the "boolean" button in his 3d program, threw some inaccurate adjectives
at
it and talks it up like it's cross sliced bread.

Not at all.
Per has suggested sheet steel and plywood.
Many other materials can be implied including composites.
For what its worth, I saw a *new* material recently, 2 sheets that when the
sheets are pulled away from each other it automatically creates *webs*
(structural) in between the sheets (sort of like corrugated cardboard or
luan doors).
As I've said all along Per has simply suggested a *way* to do things, and
has implied the materials.
I'm suggesting that the method AND the materials are yet unknown.
Face it, to chastize Per is to spit in ones own face as he is speaking of
the future and none of know what that holds.
As for me I will continue to observe and be skepticle of all things, and I
will try to hold my tongue regarding things I am not an expert on.

Don...I really think you missed my whole point...pleasae re-read my
post.

I applaud Per as a visionary, but his idea is not architecture....and
this is a forum for architecture. Personally I think you hit the nail
on the head with your reference to Edison.... yes, he had the idea,
but he didn't rest until he had found the material and the technique
to make it work. That is what Per needs to do....and then I will be
among the first to applaud his work.

Christopher


"Don" one-if-by-land.concord.com wrote in message ...
"Christopher K. Egan" wrote
You have proposed
dramatic new forms.... but you have not told us what they are or how
they are made....

Can this not be said of any advancements in the past?
Thomas Edison *conceived* the idea of the lightbulb with no knowledge of
what the key element shall be, the filament. He tried well over 1000
materials before he found that bamboo worked excellently. (in fact here at
the Fort Myers Edison Museum they have original bamboo filament light bulbs
that have been lit continuously since Edison was alive.)

A problem is identified and then a solution is discovered.
This is what Per is professing.
The limitations (problem) with *Lego* style construction, and a solution,
3DH.
Though he has not identified the steps taken to get from Lego to 3DH his
vision is totally possible in the future.
Now, having said that, I am not married to Pers concept as it is largely
speculation at this point and I am a naturally skeptical person.
I do believe however that the way we now do construction will continue to
advance, to become more streamlined and less complicated, less costly, in
the future. Who knows, maybe our grandkids will live in self sufficient
extruded 50' diameter x 200' long gravity tubes hovering 500' in the air in
the late 21st century as all the land will be used up, the resources and
animals gone and geopolitical turmoil will rule the earth.

and this makes them either meaningless or ....at
best.... undeveloped as architectural proposals.

Pers ideas are not meaningless except to those that lack vision and
imagination, and I am not sure his ideas can be limited to the
*architectural* field.

This thread was brought in from rec.boats.building. so **** off. Also
Per's "3D-H" topic has more in common with
boats than architecture anyway.


"Dazed and Confuzed" wrote in message
...
be limited to the
*architectural* field.

Please take the time to not cross post to rec.boats.building!


--
Beer, it's not just for breakfast anymore.......

On 01 Oct 2003 11:38:01 GMT, ospam (Stephen Baker)
wrote something
.......and in reply I say!:

I prefer to assume that I am up with the thread, and want to read what
the guy who has just posted says, before I read the rest, should I so
desire.

Actually, I reckon this top-post, bottom post grap, is a big
bigendian-smallendian, and does not really matter.

PS - top-posting doesn't help, either.

************************************************** ****************************************
Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach.
The rest sit around and make snide comments.

Nick White --- HEAD:Hertz Music
Please remove ns from my header address to reply via email
!!
")
_/ )
( )
_//- \__/

That's okay, Syd- it is after all from Dazed and Confused. ;-)

....And remember; boating and booze are a dangerous mix! Be safe, be 'dry',
wear a life-vest, Or be a landlubber!
-- This public service announcement brought to you from alt.architecture.

Richard

"Syd Mead"
This thread was brought in from rec.boats.building. so **** off. Also
Per's "3D-H" topic has more in common with
boats than architecture anyway.


"Dazed and Confuzed"
be limited to the
*architectural* field.

Please take the time to not cross post to rec.boats.building!


--
Beer, it's not just for breakfast anymore.......

Don...again I agree with your philosophical support for Per the
visionary...but the fact is that ...no...he has not suggested a
"method". He has only suggested a form...and he doesn't know how it
can be made or of what it can be made.

It is quite possible that someone in the 14th century thought
"Wouldn't it be cool if buildings could have 100 floors!" That isn't
architecture and I would never suggest that such a comment was the
idea for the tall buildings of the 20th century. Those were the work
of architects who solved the technical and artistic problems involved
in making such forms.

I agree with you that I like Per...but don't give him credit for what
he hasn't done.

Christopher

"Don" one-if-by-land.concord.com wrote in message ...
"Syd Mead" wrote in message
news:QbAeb.9058$Rd4.3063@fed1read07...
GS/Don quote: "Edison tried over 1000 materials...." How many has Per
tried? Even at and economical scale?

You're talking apples and oranges.
Per is suggesting a *method*, not a material.

Hi

"Christopher K. Egan" skrev i en meddelelse
om...
Don...I really think you missed my whole point...pleasae re-read my
post.

I applaud Per as a visionary, but his idea is not architecture....and
this is a forum for architecture. Personally I think you hit the nail
on the head with your reference to Edison.... yes, he had the idea,
but he didn't rest until he had found the material and the technique
to make it work. That is what Per needs to do....and then I will be
among the first to applaud his work.

Christopher

What I think is, that when the 3D-H idear catch on, it could be in a different
application than what any of us could emagine.
There are several resons I focused on the "material" "method" aspect of it.
First I am not any very good architect , ----------- surely a complete new form
language , or if this is not the right defination then a compleatly new tool
that leave a result that as much as 3D-H do, uncover the actural structure .
Will allow somone like me to put some exiting designs on display, but compared
what I know a skilled younger person , somone with a better feel or somone who
didn't need to spend his or her potential, getting to know computers the way I
had to fight my way thru, -------- somone who can focus on the creative process
more than I have had to focus on the technical solutions to the extents, that
the CAD program "said" , " well if you can't find the functions you emagine
shuld be in a CAD program, then write them yourself in Lisp".
But you are right with another issue ; as while the method in itself is quite a
raw idear that need some develobment, -------- then just that develobment will
bring a lot of new options, a lot of small or big gadgeds like the small tricks
you se the steel workers master, to make the final hands-on touch , that acturly
make the whole thing work together.
Realy the core idear is so simple , but isn't the Roman bridges simple and based
on a "simple" idear. Now back to the designs I used to recive that valuable
critic that I would not be without, then even a few of you maby think that this
dane is so square , that nothing will bite on him, ------- then please know that
without this critic , I would just think that this method or material system ,
is so great that I would end up so arogant that the whole thing would be
forgotten in a few years ; This method is so primitive that just that fact fuel
a lot of relevant critic about it. First it realy is not the best, if the one
who develob a method such as 3D-H , also promote him/her self as architect or
artist, when your strong side is _not_ architecture. Also when you read some of
the promoting I tried to put forth, I start promoting new materials for the
space industrie and end pointing to pressed hay sheets --------- realy even this
is a primitive thing, it realy gat you around. Just emagine you know some 300
english words, and must explain why and how floors grow by magic , just as a
side effect when you put an assembly produced in a special way
together, ----------- then when everyone finaly get the clue about why sheet
material is the essential matter, then you in a particular design , must explain
that now "sheet material" shuld be seen more widely, and that a tube also in
some sense can be seen and must be seen as "sheet material", as then you as a
side effect solved the problem about fire proving, as now you can cool the core
building structure in a building system, that in the most surprising way , solve
some of the fundamental fysical problems bringing the cooling water to the right
place, without stressing the structure as how the tradisional way of doing it
would effect.
How to promise new jobs and a promising future, if this shuld not involve a lot
of develobment and more new idears.
Still I know one way that this could work, that's architecture. As if you have
the same vision I had about what can be achived if you give this
method-material-system a chance I repeat ,it will blow your mind ; ---------- I
know what a skilled architect could progress with a new material , but that ask
the architects to deal with that detail that slipped out of post modern
architecture. Beside the whole concept ask a different aproach , -------- now
the basic knowleage about the programming and the 3D computer issues is easy
grasped, and even understood in pictures ; you don't need to be able to do the
somwhat difficult calculations that better than any modern architecture
application, explain you what 3D is about. But you need to know the difference
between a block on block program . You got to know and realise the dead-end with
modern architect applications, that even they do what most architects need,
place an invisible mental gate, that will keep you from realising the
oppotunity's that could grow from a new aproach , ---------- as you are quite
right, it proberly will not "end" with 3D-H , but 3D-H could start a complete
new lead, that acturly reshape the role of the architect ,-------------- now
that role already changed a few times already, but the challance with new tools
, that allow you to point in the air to reflect a vision in your mind could seem
a bit lazy for those who rather go into detail and create wonders, but if those
then did go into detail with a new digital method , the result would speak for
itself and with a better architect than I, this method would speak it's own
language .
P.C.