In my personal opinion, I am closer to your conviction than the
academic/objective perspective I presented; at least to the extent of being
able to find a "geometric" core surrounded by lots of ambiguity and
ineffability.
I even believe in the generative potential of geometric patterns like sacred
geometry, platonic solids, et. al.; with generativity going a long way towards
resolving some of the non-core elements of patterns. Alexander's NO Properties
do have some of this same quality.
in the early days of software patterns, a huge discussion point was the
"geometry" of programs and if it could be found in: a dependency graph, a
control flow / state diagram, or with 'artificial' metrics like cyclomatic
complexity or even LOC/speed of execution.
Within that discussion was an equivalent of QWAN and Liveness—"Habitability."
The latter being somehow related to the ease of understanding, 'moving around,
relating-to, and ease of modification and other things that were pretty much
emotional and definitely idiosyncratic.
Then, if you could find a geometry, was there any way to differentiate its
"goodness," "badness," or indifferent-ness?
I am spending next weekend with Jenny Quillien and Richard Gabriel and will
bring up this topic.
davew
On Mon, Oct 3, 2022, at 11:28 AM, glen wrote:
> Thanks! I think I get it, now. I don't intend to quibble over the
> meaning of the word [geo]metry. But just for provenance, I have
> (roughly) 2.5 conceptions of "geometry": 1) metric spaces, 1.5) metric
> spaces "normal" to earth and its inhabitants, and 2) anything that
> arranges points, lines, solids, etc. Under concept (2), all 15
> properties seem geometric to me, though perhaps only *reductively*.
> Under (1) and (1.5), I can see how many of them extend to
> unearthly/abnormal/pathological metrics and, of course, to non-metric
> conceptions of distance/similarity.
>
> The nameless quality and liveness also seem metric to some extent. Time
> is nothing but a special kind of space. But I can easily see why one
> would reject that. The real trick for *my* engagement is to avoid all
> this talk of architecture, about which I don't care in the slightest. I
> guess I'm just confused why these people are so anthropocentric. If
> it's *actually* theoretical biology, then it seems like termite mounds,
> rain forest structure, etc. would dominate more than "buildings" and
> such. It's so anthropocentric, it's difficult for me to believe it can
> be retooled to fit comfortably within non-human biology.
>
> I'd also like to quote from Quillien's book just to push back on how
> geometric these things are. In the section "Possibility of a New
> General Law, we see:
>
> "It could be that there is essentially something in the geometry of
> living systems that creates order by itself."
>
> "New views on the evolving system of genetic material suggest that
> evolution may follow certain pathways, not because of extraneous
> pressure, but by virtue of ordering tendencies of internal dynamics and
> the requirements of geometry."
>
> Hopefully, I could be forgiven for thinking geometry plays a huge role
> in at least this take on NO. But I'm starting to see why one might
> think it's applicable without metrics. I can't steelman it, yet,
> though. 8^D
>
> On 10/1/22 15:19, Prof David West wrote:
>> RE: Alexander and Geometry
>>
>> First, my notion of 'geometry' may be too simplistic and too Euclidean. If
>> so, please point out what I may be overlooking.
>>
>> I did a quick review of Alexander's major works and found few mentions of
>> 'geometry' as I understand the term. One of the major ones was in Timeless
>> Way where he deals with Pattern *_Languages_*. The notion that you could
>> compose architectural insights/truths/novelty by combining patterns much the
>> same way you would construct a sentence using nouns and verbs. He seems to
>> be conveying the idea of a geometry-based "grammar."
>>
>> If you count APL patterns that seem to have any naive geometric aspect,
>> e.g., "Light From Two Sides" it is less than 10%. If you look at the Fifteen
>> Properties (listed below), most (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 10, and maybe 13) are
>> conceivably 'geometric'. But the most important concept in APL/TO is "QWAN"
>> and in NO, it is "Liveness"—neither of which have any, that I can see, rely
>> on the "geometric" properties as much as they do properties like Deep
>> interlock and ambiguity, Simplicity and Inner Calm, and Not-separateness. In
>> terms of patterns from APL, this would include things like Dancing in the
>> Streets, Sleeping in Public, and Storefront Schools which, like most APL
>> patterns, have little or nothing to do with spatial arrangement/geometry.
>>
>> I asked Jenny Quillien and Richard Gabriel (both of whom worked extensively
>> with Alexander and Gabriel was responsible for arranging Chris to be keynote
>> speaker at OOPSLA) about the importance of Geometry in Alexander and neither
>> thought it was more than an afterthought or an artifact. Geometry might be
>> inferred because Alexander liked visual images like the ones attached and
>> they do show spatial arrangement, a kind of geometry.
>>
>> [ I think Alexander made a major error with his property, Alternating
>> Repetition, precisely because he expressed it "geometrically" rather than in
>> "living' terms as rhythm.]
>>
>> Nick Salingaros was a far more accomplished mathematician than Alexander,
>> and did, in much of his writing address more geometric issues/ideas. And
>> Salingaros did work with Alexander. But both of them despised contemporary
>> minimalist, functionalist, deconstructivist contemporary architectural
>> theory which dominated (and dominates) the profession. In this stance they
>> appear to be anti-geometry (and any similar formalism).
>>
>> Salingaros interviewed Alexander as to the central or most important ideas,
>> and the revolutionary nature of Alexander's work. Both men seem to agree
>> that the essence is:
>>
>>
>> /Your point is that architecture is not about//
>> /
>> /building style, but is really a state of mind, and//
>> /
>> /that good architecture is any structure, however//
>> /
>> /modest, that generates an identifiable positive//
>> /
>> /state of mind that allows you to be alive to the//
>> /
>> /fullest extent possible. This idea is profound as//
>> /
>> /well as revolutionary, since it stands architecture//
>> /
>> /on its head. You validate our most basic feelings//
>> /
>> /as human beings and insist that the built environment//
>> /
>> /must nurture our inner joy, sadness,//
>> /
>> /vulnerability, unselfconsciousness, and so on. All//
>> /
>> /the formal architectural concerns — and names//
>> /
>> /like Le Corbusier, Ludwig Mies van der Rohe,//
>> /
>> /Frank Gehry, and Daniel Libeskind — are thus//
>> /
>> /thrown out of the window./ [Salingaros]
>>
>> /The new form of//
>> /
>> /architecture that I am speaking about is beginning//
>> /
>> /to be understood by engineers, by ecologists,//
>> /
>> /by computer scientists, by builders, by//
>> /
>> /artists, by biologists, by economists. Many of//
>> /
>> /these people recognize that architects are simply//
>> /
>> /not dealing with the problem of the en-//
>> /
>> /vironment in a realistic or useful fashion, and//
>> /
>> /that the task of building now falls on their own//
>> /
>> /shoulders. Under the impact of that kind of//
>> /
>> /thinking, people are now developing new ways//
>> /
>> /of banking, new ways of development, new//
>> /
>> /forms of social reconstruction, and new forms//
>> /
>> /of housing, new forms of sustainable settlements.//
>> /
>> /In many countries, the primary way of conceiving//
>> /
>> /and making buildings and settlements//
>> /
>> /is already people-oriented. It is not recognizable//
>> /
>> /within the existing paradigm as architecture,//
>> /
>> /and architects despise it because it looks//
>> /
>> /low budget, low tech, and is oriented to people’s//
>> /
>> /desperate needs — yet all this is, within//
>> /
>> /the perspective of our new architecture, a major//
>> /
>> /contribution to the new, life-based paradigm.//
>> /
>> /All this is only its beginning. These new//
>> /
>> /kinds of professionals, and new social forms,//
>> /
>> /are beginning to develop and propagate new//
>> /
>> /ways of doing things.//
>> /
>> /And what architects now claim is simply being//
>> /
>> /laid aside as the nonsense it really is/. [Alexander]
>>
>> Still not seeing much in the way for formalism, let along geometric
>> formalism.
>>
>> davew
>>
>> Alexander's Fifteen Properties from Nature of Order
>> 1. Levels of scale
>> 2. Strong centers
>> 3. Thick boundaries
>> 4. Alternating repetition
>> 5. Positive space
>> 6. Good shape
>> 7. Local symmetries
>> 8. Deep interlock and ambiguity
>> 9. Contrast
>> 10. Gradients
>> 11. Roughness
>> 12. Echoes
>> 13. The void
>> 14. Simplicity and inner calm
>> 15. Not-separateness
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 28, 2022, at 3:02 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
>> > For construction and repair tasks, I would usually need to do some
>> > planning and reflection. Work out ahead of time what is needed with
>> > some help from Google. Or just hire out the work to someone that is
>> > an expert. Anyway, more power to you and your hardware store friends.
>> > I don’t feel their absence.
>> >
>> >> On Sep 28, 2022, at 11:55 AM, glen <[email protected]
>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> And there're other things you don't get from delivery businesses: 1)
>> socialization and 2) tacit knowledge. When we set up our "office" in an
>> industrial space in Oregon, the ceilings were very high. We had no real
>> ideas for how to build the welding barriers and other things. We broached
>> the problem to the handy dudes at the local hardware store and all 4 of us
>> came up with an easy and cheap solution. We 1) made some friends 2) with
>> different knowledge from ours.
>> >>
>> >> I know such things may not matter to some who are anti-social and/or so
>> wicked smart they never need anyone else's ideas. But for this less
>> socialized moron, they're important.
>> >>
>> >> Amazon is definitely *not* easier or faster at either of those things.
>> >>
>> >>> On 9/28/22 10:01, Steve Smith wrote:
>> >>>> On 9/28/22 10:38 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
>> >>>> Amazon is almost always easier and faster than a local business that
>> have thin inventory and higher margins. A local business is a place get
>> COVID. I find I usually order hardware and equipment online from Home Depot
>> because the store inventory is kept thin on purpose (like because it is
>> stolen). This is why Amazon is on top. It is a better way to do business
>> and they are really good at it.
>> >>> I still buy from local businesses as much as I can *so they will be
>> there when I want/need them*... I also find ordering online and picking up
>> at my front door exquisitely more convenient "in the moment", whether it is
>> Amazon or Home Depot or Autozone. But then there are those times when I
>> don't want to wait a day or three for the plumbing part that gets my
>> bathroom back to working and it would really suck if the (Ace) Hardware
>> store run by the local pueblo were closed (they closed a *lot* during COVID
>> and during the "great resignation" we are still in).
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Not everyone is a cow. We are selected and self-selected into
>> organizations were our personalities and abilities work. Some are farmers,
>> some are cows. When the cows are left to wander, they get frustrated and
>> call for farmers. Il Duce!
>> >>> You sound a lot like John Galt!
>> >>> And just to double-down on the "aphorisms": "when you own a cow, the
>> cow owns you". I think it goes for golden geese also. And I think maybe
>> Mr. Putin is maybe going to get a kick in the teeth by the golden-goose-cow
>> he has owned now for 30? years...
>
>
> --
> ꙮ Mɥǝu ǝlǝdɥɐuʇs ɟᴉƃɥʇ' ʇɥǝ ƃɹɐss snɟɟǝɹs˙ ꙮ
>
> -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom
> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
> archives: 5/2017 thru present
> https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
-. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom
https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
archives: 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
