Thesis book by Khaled Riad

To express ideas of uncertainty and indeterminism - through the philosophy behind quantum theory - in architectural form, space, and experience.

The Indeterminate Construct

A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the Architecture Department in Partial FulďŹ llment of the Requirements for the Degree of Masters of Architecture at Savannah College of Art and Design

Khaled Riad Savannah, Georgia August 2014

The Author hereby grants SCAD permission to reproduce and to distribute publicly paper and electronic thesis copies of document in whole or in part in any medium now known or hereafter created.

Khaled Riad Author

Professor Judith Reno Committee chair

Professor Scott Dietz Committee member

Professor Algar Thagne Committee member

The Indeterminate Construct

A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the Architecture Department in Partial FulďŹ llment of the Requirements for the Degree of Masters of Architecture at Savannah College of Art and Design

Khaled Riad Savannah, Georgia August 2014

Professor Judith Reno, Committee Chair Professor Scott Dietz, Committee Member Professor Algar Thagne, Committee Member

To my family. Thank you for the endless support.

Professor Reno, Thank you for your patience and critical questioning of my every move to make my argument stronger. Professor Dietz, Thank you for pushing me and this investigation further within every conversation we had.

Professor Thagne, Thank you for continuously being there and helping me materialize the idea to a more compelling design.

Table of Contents. List of Figures: Abstract: Part One: Part Two: Part Three: Part Four: Conclusion: Appendix: Works Cited:

1 15 17 57 77 89 121 125 129

List of Figures. Part 1. Figure 1.1 - Demolition of Pruitt-Igoe. “Iconic Pruitt-Igoe Implosion.” Photgraph. n.d.. Press Materials. The Pruitt-Igoe Myth. Web. Date accessed: 12 Jan. 2014. Figure 1.2 - Archigram Control and Choice. “Control and Choice”. Drawing. n.d. Control and Choice. Archigram. Web. Date accessed:11 Jan. 2014. Figure 1.3 - Change in Surrounding at Speed of Light. Shlain, Leonard. “Countryside viewed from a train traveling past at 93,000 miles per second.” Art and Physics: Parallel Visions in Space, Time, and Light. New York: William Morrow, 1991. pp 127. Figure 9.5.. Print. Figure 1.4 - Simultaneous View of Objects. Shlain, Art and Physics. “View of a house from a train traveling past it at 5 miles per hour and 93,000 miles per second.” pp 128. Figure 9.6. Figure 1.5 - Barcelona Pavilion Floor Plan. Rohe, Mies van der. “Barcelona Pavilion: Plan.” Drawing. n.d.. AD Classics. Archdaily. Web. Date accessed: 29 Jul. 2014. Figure 1.6 - Robie House Floor Plan. Wright, Frank L. “Frederick C. Robie House: Main Floor Plan.” Drawing. n.d.. AD Classics. Archdaily. Web. Date accessed: 29 Jul. 2014. Figure 1.7- Colour Box. Albert, David. Quantum Mechanics and Experience. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press. 1992. pp 2. Figure 1.1. Print. (Edited by author). Figure 1.8 - Hardness Box. Albert, Quantum. pp 3. Figure 1.2. (Edited by author). Figure 1.9 - Colour-Hardness Box. Albert, Quantum. (Edited by author). Figure 1.10 - Colour-Hardness-Colour Box. Albert, Quantum. (Edited by author).

Figure 1.11 - Superposition Box. Author. Figure 1.12 - Contemporary City. Le Corbusier. “The City of tomorrow and its planning”. In: The City Reader. R. Leagtes and F. Stout. eds. Routledge. 1927. pp 375. Quantum City. by Ayssar Arida. Oxford: Architectural Press. 2002. pp 89. Figure 5.1. Print. Figure 1.13 - Dualism Table. Arida, Quantum City. pp 78. Table 4.2. (Edited by author). Figure 1.14 - Event A. Arida, Quantum City. pp 149. Figure 8.4. Figure 1.15 - Event A and B. Arida, Quantum City. pp 150. Figure 8.5. Figure 1.16 - Event ABC and Observer. Arida, Quantum City. pp 154. Figure 8.9. Figure 1.17 - Determinate Path. Author. Figure 1.18 - Indeterminate Path. Author. Figure 1.19 - Asymmetric Indeterminate Path. Author. Figure 1.20 - Symmetric Indeterminate Path. Author. Figure 1.21 - Grand Central Station. “Ceiling of Grand Central”. Photograph. n.d.. Secrets of Grand Central Terminal. NewYork.com. Web. Date accessed: 13 Nov. 2013. Figure 1.22 - Duality of Shapes into Perspective. Author.

Figure 1.23 - Pantheon with Circle Inscribed. Ching, Francis. Architecture: Form, Space, and Order 2nd ed. “The Pantheon, Rome, A.D. 120 - 124. Portico from temple of 25 B.C.”. New Jersey: John Wiley and son. 1996. pp 196. Print. (Edited by Author). Figure 1.24 - Metamophosis of Trickling Towers. Cook, Peter. Arcadia: Peter Cook, Trickling Towers. A+U: Architecture and Urbanism. No 113. Tokyo, Japan: A+U Publishing Co. Feb 1980. pp 75. Print. Figure 1.25 - Archigram Control and Choice. “Control and Choice”. Drawing. n.d. Control and Choice. Archigram. Web. Date accessed:11 Jan. 2014. Figure 1.26 - Fun Palace Section Perspective. Price, Cedric. “Fun Palace Section”. The Fun Palace: Cedric Price’s Experiment in Architecture and Technology. by Stanley Matthews. Technoetic Arts: A Journal of Speculative Research. Vol 3. Number 2. Bristol: Intellect LTD. 2005. Figure 2. pp 75. Print. Figure 1.27 - Fun Palace Plan 1. Price, Fun Palace. “Fun Palace Plan”. Figure 4. pp 77. Figure 1.28 - Diagram of Fun Palace. Price, Cedric. “Fun Palace Diagram”. 1961. Anti-Vitruv & Super-Brunelleschi. Relational Thought WordPress. Web. Date accessed 11 Jan. 2014. Figure 1.29 - Radical Reconstruction 1. Woods, Lebbeus. “A Typical Residential Block”. n.d.. War and Architecture. Lebbeus Woods WordPress. Web. Date accessed 27 Jan. 2014. Figure 1.30 - Radical Reconstruction 2. Woods, War and Architecture. “New Parliament”. Date accessed 27 Jan. 2014. Figure 1.31 - Siteline Vienna Idea Construct. Woods, Lebbeus. “Siteline Vienna Concept”. Urban Performance Structures. Lebbeus Woods. Web. Date accessed 24 Apr. 2014. Figure 1.32 - Siteline Vienna Model 1. Woods, Urban Performance Structures. “Siteline Vienna Models”. Date accessed 24 Apr. 2014.

Figure 1.33 - Siteline Vienna Model 2. Woods, Urban Performance Structures. “Siteline Vienna Models”. Date accessed 24 Apr. 2014. Figure 1.34 - Siteline Vienna Model 3. Woods, Urban Performance Structures. “Siteline Vienna Models”. Date accessed 24 Apr. 2014. Figure 1.35 - Fast Twitch Perspective 1. Chard, Nat. Kulper, Perry. “Fast Twitch”. Fathoming the Unfathomable: Archival Ghosts + Paradoxical Shadows. Pamphlet Architecture 34. New York: Princeton Architectural Press. 2014. pp 14. Print. Figure 1.36 - Fast Twitch Perspective 2. Chard & Kulper, Fathoming the Unfathomable. “Fast Twitch”. 2014. pp. 29 Figure 1.37 - Fast Twitch Perspective 3. Kulper, Perry. “Fast Twitch”. Fast Twitch Drawings. Perry Kulper. Web. Date Accessed 27 Jan. 2014. Figure 1.38 - Fast Twitch Perspective 4. Kulper, Fast Twitch Drawings. “Fast Twitch”. Web. Date Accessed 27 Jan. 2014. Figure 1.39 - Fast Twitch Composite Drawing 1. Chard & Kulper, Fathoming the Unfathomable. “Fast Twitch”. 2014. pp. 15. Figure 1.40 - Fast Twitch Composite Drawing 2. Kulper, Fast Twitch Drawings. “Fast Twitch”. Web. Date Accessed 27 Jan. 2014. Figure 1.41 - Folded Map. Chard & Kulper, Fathoming the Unfathomable. “Folded Map of Copenhagen”. 2014. pp. 44. Figure 1.42 - Drawing Instrument 1. Chard, Nat. “Instrument Five.” Drawing Instruments. Nat Chard. Web. Date accessed 27 Jan. 2014 Figure 1.43 - Drawing Instrument 2. Chard, Drawing Instruments. “Instrument Two” Nat Chard. Date accessed 27 Jan. 2014

Figure 1.44 - Drawing Instrument 3. Chard & Kulper, Fathoming the Unfathomable. “Folded Map of Copenhagen”. 2014. pp. 57. Figure 1.45 - Drawing Instrument 4 Chard & Kulper, Fathoming the Unfathomable. “Folded Map of Copenhagen”. 2014. pp. 47. Figure 1.46 - Drawing Instrument 5 Chard & Kulper, Fathoming the Unfathomable. “Folded Map of Copenhagen”. 2014. pp. 45.

Part 2. Figure 2.1 - Demonstration of the Uncertainty Principle with Standard Opening. Muller, Derek. Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle Explained. Veritasium, Youtube. Youtube. January 14. 2013. Web. Date accessed Jan 27 2014. (Edited by author). Figure 2.2 - Demonstration of the Uncertainty Principle with Narrow Opening. Muller, Derek. Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle Explained. Veritasium, Youtube. Youtube. January 14. 2013. Web. Date accessed Jan 27 2014. (Edited by author). Figure 2.3 - Bab Zouela. Author. Figure 2.4 - Ink Splop. Author. Figure 2.5 - Blending. Author. Figure 2.6 - Obscuring. Author. Figure 2.7 - Empty Room. Author. Figure 2.8 - Room with Regular Grid. Author.

Figure 2.9 - Room with Diagonal Grid. Author. Figure 2.10 - Movement in a Field. Author. Figure 2.11 - Attractor/Repeller. Author. Figure 2.12 - Movement Through Attractor/Repeller. Author. Figure 2.13 - Change in Shadow Over 6 Hours. Author. Figure 2.14 - Experience of Space at Different Times of Day. Author. Figure 2.15 - Transformative Model Image 1. Author. Figure 2.16 - Transformative Model Image 2. Author. Figure 2.17 - Transformative Model Image 3. Author. Figure 2.18 - Transformative Model Image 4. Author. Figure 2.19 - Transformative-Indistinct and Static-Clear. Author. Figure 2.20 - A Palimpsest of Events. Detroit Publishing Co., “Broughton Street, Looking East, Savannah, GA.” Library of Congress. Digitally Enhanced, “Savannah, Georgia, circa 1905.” Savannah Electric 1905 Shorpy. Web. Date accessed 2 February 2014. (Edited by author). Figure 2.21 - Embrace Pandemonium. Author.

Figure 2.22 - Savannah City Plan. Author (Collaboration with Saara Jazeel and Cassie Bray in ARCH405, Studio V). Figure 2.23 - Site Context. Imagery ©2014 Google, Map data ©2014 Google. (Edited by author). Figure 2.24 - Three Sites. Imagery ©2014 Google, Map data ©2014 Google. (Edited by author). Figure 2.25 - Broughton 30x90 Context Imagery 1. Photographed by Author. Figure 2.26 - Broughton 30x90 Context Imagery 2. Photographed by Author. Figure 2.27 - Broughton 30x90 Context Imagery 3. Photographed by Author. Figure 2.28 - Broughton 30x90 Site Section. Author. Figure 2.29 - Broughton 60x90 Context Imagery 1. Photographed by Author. Figure 2.30 - Broughton 60x90 Context Imagery 2. Photographed by Author. Figure 2.31 - Broughton 60x90 Context Imagery 3. Photographed by Author. Figure 2.32 - Broughton 60x90 Site Section. Author. Figure 2.33 - Jefferson 60x90 Context Imagery 1. Photographed by Author. Figure 2.34 - Jefferson 60x90 Context Imagery 2. Photographed by Author.

Figure 2.35 - Jefferson 60x90 Context Imagery 3. Photographed by Author. Figure 2.36 - Jefferson 60x90 Site Section. Author.

Part 3. Figure 3.1 - Folds, Materials, & Light Characteristics. Author. Figure 3.2 - Folding Paper to DeďŹ ne Space. Author. Figure 3.3 - Folded Model Image 1. Author. Figure 3.4 - Folded Model Image 2. Author. Figure 3.5 - Folded Model Image 3. Author. Figure 3.6 - Folded Model Image 4. Author. Figure 3.7 - Folds, Materials, & Light Characteristics 2. Author. Figure 3.8 - Superimposed Folded Model. Author. Figure 3.9 - Superimposed Folded Model Cutout. Author. Figure 3.10 -Line Drawing of Superimposed Folded Model. Author.

Figure 3.11 - Combined Line Drawing and Superimposed Folded Model. Author. Figure 3.12 - Combined Line Drawing and Superimposed Folded Model With 3 Dimensional Surface Highlighted 1. Author. Figure 3.13 - Combined Line Drawing and Superimposed Folded Model With 3 Dimensional Surface Highlighted 2. Author. Figure 3.14 - Combined Line Drawing and Superimposed Folded Model With 3 Dimensional Surface Highlighted 3. Author. Figure 3.15 - Combined Highlighted Surfaces. Author. Figure 3.16 - Folded Surface Image 1. Author. Figure 3.17 - Folded Surface Image 2. Author. Figure 3.18 - Folded Surface Image 3. Author. Figure 3.19 - Folded Surface Drawing. Author. Figure 3.20 - Plan of Folded Surface Iteration 1. Author. Figure 3.21 - Plan of Folded Surface Iteration 2. Author. Figure 3.22 - Plan of Folded Surface Iteration 3. Author.

Figure 3.23 - Isometric of Folded Surface Iteration 1. Author. Figure 3.24 - Isometric of Folded Surface Iteration 2. Author. Figure 3.25 - Isometric of Folded Surface Iteration 3. Author. Figure 3.26 - Three-Threshold Model Vantage Point 1. Author. Figure 3.27 - Three-Threshold Model Vantage Point 2. Author. Figure 3.28 - Three-Threshold Model Overview. Author. Figure 3.29 - Superimposing Vantage Points of Three-Threshold Model. Author.

Part 4. Figure 4.1 - Southwest Isometric of First Iteration. Author. Figure 4.2 - First Floor Plan of 30x90 Broughton (First Iteration). Author. Figure 4.3 - Third Floor Plan of 30x90 Broughton (First Iteration). Author. Figure 4.4 - Exterior Perspective of 30x90 Broughton (First Iteration). Author. Figure 4.5 - Section A of 30x90 Broughton (First Iteration). Author.

Figure 4.6 - Interior Perspective of 30x90 Broughton (First Iteration). Author. Figure 4.7 - Section B of 30x90 Broughton (First Iteration). Author. Figure 4.8 - First Floor Plan of 60x90 Broughton (First Iteration). Author. Figure 4.9 - Second Floor Plan of 60x90 Broughton (First Iteration). Author. Figure 4.10 - Third Floor Plan of 30x90 Broughton (First Iteration). Author. Figure 4.11 - Interior Perspective of 60x90 Broughton (First Iteration). Author. Figure 4.12 - Section A of 60x90 Broughton (First Iteration). Author. Figure 4.13 - Exterior Perspective of 60x90 Broughton (First Iteration). Author. Figure 4.14 - Section B of 60x90 Broughton (First Iteration). Author. Figure 4.15 - First Floor Plan of 60x90 Jefferson (First Iteration). Author. Figure 4.16 - Second Floor Plan of 60x90 Jefferson (First Iteration). Author. Figure 4.17 - Interior Perspective of 60x90 Jefferson (First Iteration). Author. Figure 4.18 - Section A of 60x90 Jefferson (First Iteration). Author.

Figure 4.19 - Exterior Perspective of 60x90 Jefferson (First Iteration). Author. Figure 4.20 - Section B of 60x90 Jefferson (First Iteration). Author. Figure 4.21 - Southwest Isometric of Second Iteration. Author. Figure 4.22 - Section A of Three Building Constructs. Author. Figure 4.23 - Section B of Three Building Constructs. Author. Figure 4.24 - First Floor of Three Building Constructs. Author. Figure 4.25- Second Floor of Three Building Constructs. Author. Figure 4.26 - Third Floor of Three Building Constructs. Author. Figure 4.27 - Fourth Floor of Three Building Constructs. Author. Figure 4.28 - Location Key Diagram 1. Author. Figure 4.29 - Interior Perspective 1 of 30x90 Broughton (Second Iteration). Author. Figure 4.30 - Exterior Perspective of 30x90 Broughton (Second Iteration). Author. Figure 4.31- Interior Perspective 2 of 30x90 Broughton (Second Iteration). Author.

Figure 4.32 - Exterior Perspective of 60x90 Broughton (Second Iteration). Author. Figure 4.33 - Location Key Diagram 2. Author. Figure 4.34 - Interior Perspective 1 of 60x90 Broughton (Second Iteration). Author. Figure 4.35 - Interior Perspective 2 of 60x90 Broughton (Second Iteration). Author. Figure 4.36 - Location Key Diagram 3. Author. Figure 4.37 - Exterior Perspective 1 of 60x90 Jefferson (Second Iteration). Author. Figure 4.38 - Exterior Perspective 2 of 60x90 Jefferson (Second Iteration). Author.

Appendix. Figure A.1 - Final Exhibition Board 1. Author. Figure A.2 - Final Exhibition Board 2. Author.

Abstract. The Indeterminate Construct

The Indeterminate Construct

Interdisciplinary approach has long been advocated as methods to study architectural design and research. A variety of combinations include art and architecture, music and architecture, literature and architecture, and much more. Using a multitude of various ideals and thought from other fields constructs a denser conceptual framework to understand space and design. Research in science has always made an impact in our society in the obvious manner of advancement in technology to the more inconspicuous manner of sculpting society’s mindset. Newton’s laws changed how we once thought of the physical world, until Einstein formulated new theories that upturned what we once thought was correct. Today, research in Quantum theory demonstrates a reality that is more volatile to what we deem it to be; one that refutes Newton and Descartes’ cause and effect relationship. Utilizing uncertainty behind quantum theory can improve the understanding of our surrounding reality. Yet, we confine with classical thought as it is more comforting to rely on it’s assurance. This thesis will look into how scientific theory, specifically the philosophy behind quantum theory, can serve as a model to embody an architectural design and provide a means to express our complex and indeterminate reality. It is through physical objects such as buildings can we begin to understand and formulate a direction towards the peculiarities behind a quantum mindset.

Part One. Uncertainty in Architecture:

Arguable Position

Implication of Theories:

Introduction The Theory of Relativity Quantum Theory The Measurement Problem Philosophical Definition of Uncertainty Proxemics Definition of Uncertainty Superposition and Consciousness Conclusion

Quantum Architecture:

Introduction Newtonian and Quantum Mindset Quantum Architecture as a Metaphor Path in a Quantum Mindset Duality in Architecture Conclusion

Case Studies: Archigram Cedric Price Lebbeus Woods Perry Kulper Nat Chard

Uncertainty in Architecture Arguable Position. There is a compulsory need for order and regulation within our mind set, particularly in the realm of design, and that is translated to our manifestations. Our architecture and urban designs try to force a deterministic agenda when the surrounding in terms of buildings and more so, people are indeterministic in nature. There are many examples of that in modernism, particularly when the city was envisioned as being a deterministic machine, going further into dividing it into four functional zones: residential, recreation, work and transportation. It was an approach that had a certain outcome, but once applied to actuality it failed to meet their expectation in many cases, and the demolition of Pruitt Igoe exempliﬁed that. Architectural design serves as an answer to programmatic, contextual, and life cycle attributes that are predicted to occur. However, this does not allow for ﬂexibility when the complexities and transformation of the surrounding happen; and the ease of change is much more prevalent today than ever before, due to technological advances. The works of Archigram established a discourse of the uncertainty within architecture: “buildings with no capacity to change can only become slums or ancient monuments.” Their discussions revolved around projects such as “Control and Choice” and through architectural drawings that are open to interpretation – as indeterminism is not only discussed as proposed buildings but as well in the process of design.

Figure 1.1 Demolition of Pruitt-Igoe

Worldviews shape an understanding of reality. Whether consciously or not, it has provided a foundation on the way societies think and implement. The resurgence or downfall of a civilization is tied with their beliefs. Philosophy, religion, politics, or economy all had a contribution to shape our existence. However, it is no question that the scientific revolution sculpted the framework of our environment – during the industrial revolution, modernism, and postmodernism in the succeeding centuries - and part of that environment was expressed through architecture. This thesis will look into how scientific theory, specifically the philosophy behind quantum theory, can serve as a model to embody an architectural design and provide a means to express our complex and indeterminate reality.

Figure 1.2 Archigram, Control and Choice

Implications of Theories Introduction. There are two ways one can look at the theories that have deﬁned our world for centuries. One way is to simply use them as means to make predictions and the other is to use them in order to understand. There is a notable difference between predicting and understanding, or facts and explanation. While facts give direct answers, explanations provide the outlet and ability to answer other problems, and that is the root of theory. As David Deutsch puts it, “We understand the fabric of reality only by understanding theories that explain it. And since they explain more than we are immediately aware of, we can understand more than we are immediately aware that we understand.” (Deutsch 12). A theory can have the capability to describe the notions of our reality in an effective manner. According to Deutsch, there are two theories that are deeper in their ability to explain; Einstein’s general theory of relativity and quantum theory. Both have provided a revolutionary mode of explanation of physical reality (Deutsch 2324) and both will be analyzed on the basis of how they can be seen as models for works of art, and used to understand our surrounding reality. While there is no doubt that they transformed the physics world, in can be argued that they affected other ﬁelds and are embodied within them as well. Fields such as art, architecture, philosophy, psychology, and anthropology can be said to have used aspects of these theories as models and will be further discussed.

The Theory of Relativity. Before Einstein formulated his theory, notions of space and time were governed by the Newtonian classical model. Space and time were absolute and one did not affect the other. It was understood that measurement of time between two events would be the same for whoever measured it and wherever it was measured from. Einstein revealed that time and space are in fact not absolute, it was the speed of light that was constant. Thus time is not perceived to be the same by different observers, as well as the space traveled by what is being observed. The theory of relativity revolutionized our understanding of the world and in turn, affected it as well. When the theory is put into terms of what we perceive, a few interesting phenomena arise. For example, ďŹ gure 1.3 showcases the transformation of physical objects when an observer approaches the speed of light. When on a train traveling at high speeds, objects seems to become vertically elongated with their tops curving away from the perpendicular (Shlain 126). Furthermore, relativistic properties include the ability to view more than one side of an object as shown in ďŹ gure 1.4. In a high speed train, the objects outside seem to morph to where the front and side of a house can be seen simultaneously (Shlain 127).

ABOVE: Figure 1.3 Change in Surrounding at Speed of Light

LEFT: Figure 1.4 Simultaneous View of Objects

In his book, Space, Time and Architecture: The Growth of a New Tradition, Sigfried Giedion revealed that there was an impact of Einstein’s theory of relativity on art and architecture during the early stages of modernism (Giedion 1941). It seems that there was an attempt to incorporate those ideas to works of art and architecture as an embodiment of the spirit of the time. Simultaneity in Cubism led to the separation of perspective to viewing the objects “relatively” from all sides, i.e. above/below or inside/ outside (Giedion). Cubists wanted to give the viewer multiple vantage points of all sides of the still life, portrait or landscape, rather than paint a one vantage point the Renaissance perspective painting would provide. It was this notion of simultaneity that was exempliﬁed in their paintings. In terms of architecture, relativity manifested itself in works like the open plan of Mies van der Rohe’s Barcelona Pavilion (Figure 1.5) and Frank Lloyd Wright’s Robie House (Figure 1.6) (Lobell). The open plan allowed the ability to sense the entirety of the space in a simultaneous and homogeneous manner much akin to the idea behind many cubist paintings during the time.

FROM TOP To BOTTOM: Figure 1.5 Barcelona Pavilion Floor Plan Figure 1.6 Robie House Floor Plan

Similarly, in The Eyes of the Skin: Architecture and the Senses, Juhani Pallasmaa mentions simultaneity and couples it with perception. “It is evident that ‘life-enhancing’ architecture has to address all the senses simultaneously and fuse our image of self with our experience of the world.” (Pallasmaa 11). Pallasmaa argues that the sense of vision has long been the predominate sense used to appreciate and experience architecture. It is through a simultaneous usage of all senses that great architecture is inhabited. As shown in the above examples, the concept behind the theory of relativity provides various outlets to enrich a ﬁeld when the theory is used as a model. The notion of science explaining our physical world in new ways is not a surprise. And so understanding the ideas behind quantum theory can provide this type of enrichment in the world we live in today. To apply these theories on a macro level leads to many interesting discoveries.

Quantum Theory. It is important to note that theories are models that describe and explain both a particular question and its answer, rather than just to give the answer or facts. As Ferdinand Verhulst would say, “A model … is a metaphor with something added, it has not only qualitative but also quantitative aspects which adds to the precision of description.” (Verhulst). When used effectively theories such as quantum physics can be used to help investigate issues within certain ﬁelds such as philosophy, consciousness and proxemics. Before explaining quantum theory, it is important to understand on a conceptual level classical physics in order to have a comparison between the two. Classical physics, or Newtonian physics, is very much governed by laws set out by Isaac Newton, which in turn were developments of the work of Galileo. It has the ability to represent physical objects and their behaviour in terms of particular properties, which are abstracted to follow the mathematics behind the theories (Plotnitsky 44). When viewed with a philosophical undertone, classical physics can be seen as realist, causal, and deterministic. Realist, because it fully describes all physical properties of an object to explain their behaviour, causal because the initial state of a system can determine states at any other point in time, and deterministic because of the ability to know the state of a classical system at any point and – in principle and in ideal cases – to know the state at any other point (Plotnitsky 45). Newtonian classical mechanics, however, failed to describe in an effective manner, chance and statistical probability in nature, such as the inner workings of an atom. While there are classical theories (statistical physics and classical chaos theory) which delve into chance, they do not paint a clear picture in terms of behaviour of objects. In other words, classical physics was unable to account for atomic structure, and the stability of matter, so, between the 1920s and 1930s, quantum mechanics was developed with the intention to replace the laws of Newton. At the same time, the development of the quantum model also described the physical world on a macro stage with the same degree of accuracy of that of the classical model.

Quantum mechanics is neither realist, causal, nor deterministic in the same way that classical thought was described. It is impossible to assign physical entities to quantum objects, it is unpredictable in nature and so impossible to determine states of systems at any given point. It thus effectively describes the chaotic nature of a micro world (Plotnitsky 45). Despite the theory’s empirical success in the micro realm of atoms, protons, electrons, and quarks, it faces difficulty in accounting for our experience in the macro realm. Stating the indeﬁniteness of particular properties such as position of an electron seems viable, but seems hard to come by in our everyday experience with objects such as tables, chairs, or even buildings. We experience these objects in front of us and know of their existence and properties associated with it such as position, colour, size and shape without a doubt in mind. Yet, quantum theory still implies in some way that there is a type of uncertainty exists among objects in our common reality. (Butterﬁeld 113)

The Measurement Problem. This implication refers to the ‘measurement problem’ many theorists have spent debating. In order to explain that problem one can refer to the diagrams and analogies provided by David Albert in Quantum Mechanics and Experience. Consider a box with three openings that has the ability to measure the colour of an electron. The first opening on the left allows electrons to enter the box, while the openings on the top and right allow for black and white electrons to exit respectively. This device allows for us to know the colour property of the electron by its final position. When we add another colour box, precisely all white electrons that exit the first colour box will exit from the same aperture on the second one (figure 1.7).

50% will exit

Colour

w 50% will exit

Colour

w 100% will exit

Figure 1.7 Colour Box

Now consider another type of box, a hardness box. This box has the ability to determine the hardness of an electron in a similar fashion to the colour box. In fact the outcomes and rules that emerge are similar (figure1.8). What if we bring the two different boxes together (figure 1.9)? Experiments show that exactly half the white electrons that go through the hardness box will be hard and the other half will be soft. Suppose we align three boxes in this specific order, colour – hardness – colour (figure 1.10). If white electrons pass the hardness box and half of these electrons emerge out of the soft aperture, then the expected outcome by the third box is that all electrons that exit will be white. This does not happen. Instead, exactly half the electrons emerge out of the black aperture and the other half out of the white aperture. The measurement of the hardness of the electrons affected and tampered with the colour.

50% will exit

Hardness

s 50% will exit

Hardness

This example outlines Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle in quantum mechanics. “Measurable physical properties like colour and hardness are said to be ‘incompatible’ with one another, since measurements of one will (so far as we know) always necessarily disrupt the other.” (Albert 7). Also, the increase in precision in the measurement of one variable will lead to the decrease in precision in the measurement of the other. To some degree this can be interpreted to even have unambiguous values of physical properties; that is enhancing a sense of indeﬁniteness.

s 100% will exit

Figure 1.8 Hardness Box

50% will exit

Colour

50% will exit

Colour

50% will exit

w 50% will exit

Hardness

50% will exit

s 50% will exit

Colour

w 50% will exit

FROM TOP To BOTTOM: Figure 1.9 Colour-Hardness Box Figure 1.10 Colour-Hardness-Colour Box

Philosophical Definition of Uncertainty. Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari further commented on this phenomena assumed by the observer through its relation to objectivity. “Even in quantum physics, Heisenberg’s demon does not express the impossibility of measuring both the speed and the position of a particle on the grounds of a subjective interference of the measure with the measured, but it measures exactly an objective state of affairs.” (Deleuze & Guattari 129). According to Arkady Plotnitsky, Heisenberg’s demon creates chance and a certain element of disorder and chaos - which Deleuze and Guattari tie to the concept of the virtual - that is unavoidable. There are three forms of chaos; disorder, the incomprehensible, and – as Deleuze would say – the virtual. The virtual in this context is seen as an aspect of reality that is ideal yet real. An example of that could be senses, or perception; while both are manifested concepts, they play an intangible role in reality. Deleuze and Guattari define chaos as follows: Chaos is defined not so much by its disorder as by the infinite speed with which every form taking shape in it vanishes. It is a void that is not a nothingness but a virtual, containing all possible particles and drawing out all possible forms, which spring up only to disappear immediately, without consistency or reference, without consequence. Chaos is an infinite speed of birth and disappearance.” (Deleuze & Guattari 118). Plotnitsky argues that all three forms of chaos “are found, and are connected in quantum mechanics” and provides examples to illustrate his claim (Plotnitsky 48). Assume a photographic plate is at a certain distance from a source emitting an electron and is used to perform measurements by tracing the outcomes on the plate. In terms of classical mechanics, the outcome would be the same particle (an electron) and its position could be predicted. However, in terms of quantum mechanics, the outcome could be varied (an electron, photon, positron, or even nothing) and there is a probability for each outcome to occur. This relates to chaos as chance and is unavoidable in this theory. Additionally this shows that in quantum theory many types of particles are involved and how they coexist together is through an analogy by Plotnitsky referring back to Deleuze’s definition of virtual chaos: “a continuous emergence and disappearance, creation and annihilation, of particles from point to point.” (Plotnitsky 48).

Proxemics Definition of Uncertainty. Analogous to the measurement problem is the idea of gaze outlined by Jacques Lacan. The feeling of discomfort one feels when being gazed at by another person is, in some ways, similar to idea of a physical value being altered or tampered once observed or measured. There is an unpredictable change in emotions when being gazed upon which most probably reﬂects on the person’s ‘proxemics’, coined by Edward Hall. Proxemics deals with one’s social and personal space and their perception of it is greatly varied from one culture to another (Hall). However, that perception of personal space, and the surrounding space, gets diminished once one is inﬂicted upon a gaze.

Superposition and Consciousness. This notion of uncertainty leads to the idea behind superposition. Superposition states that, a property of an element, such as position, cannot be certainly stated unless the act of observation occurs. In other words, it cannot be said that the position of a particle is at point A, point B, both, or neither. Only by the act of ripping the boxes from the previous examples open and observing the condition will make the state of superposition cease to exist. Consider the analogy of this phenomena in the macro scale. A person faces a closed space that can be entered from opening A and exited from opening B. While the initial and final states can be observed and predicted, the path taken inside is unpredictable (figure 1.11). Only through an event which allows the person to make sense of their position inside that closed space will this unpredictable route cease to exist. The ability to reflect on oneself and relate to the surroundings to obtain some sort of reference at that given moment in space and time allows one to be conscious and coherent on the path taken. The question then becomes, how can people reflect upon themselves? It must be via something they can relate to, whether it is another person or object such as a landmark. In terms of a city as orthogonal as New York, or as haphazard as Atlanta, superposition can occur unless an element of interaction is introduced. That is, experience cannot be accounted for without these elements. In fact describing one’s position effectively occurs through things we can relate to, for example, street names, famous places, billboards, statues, events, and people. Without these elements, a notion of superposition will always exist.

Figure 1.11 Superposition Box

Conclusion. Theories have long been able to define our world and express them in an abstract manner so that we can understand our reality better. They have been tested and disproved, articulated and improved over centuries, always finding a more suitable model to express our surroundings. Many times they transformed the field of physics, and can be argued that they affected other fields as well. Elements of the Newtonian classical model can be exemplified in renaissance perspective paintings, while Einstein’s relativity model surfaced in the works of cubist paintings and in architecture such as the Robbie House and Barcelona Pavilion. It has additionally been shown that quantum theory has been typified as a model for philosophy, proxemics, and consciousness. The next question then becomes, how can it be embodied and serve as a model for our architecture?

Quantum Implication on Architecture Introduction. Worldviews shape an understanding of reality. Whether consciously or not, it has provided a foundation on the way societies think and implement. The resurgence or downfall of a civilization is tied with their beliefs. Philosophy, religion, politics, or economy all had a contribution to shape our existence. However, it is no question that the scientific revolution sculpted the framework of our environment – during the industrial revolution, modernism, and postmodernism in the succeeding centuries - and part of that environment was expressed through architecture. The Scientific Revolution provided us with thinkers like, Nicolas Copernicus, Galileo Galilei, Rene Descartes, and Isaac Newton. They outlined the ability to breakdown problems into smaller components in order to analyze them, and since then it has been our ever growing skill. It is a method first developed by Descartes and continues to describe determinate behaviour of our physical world, a method that we would come to terms as Newtonian/ Classical mechanics. Classical mechanics can be seen as realist, causal, and deterministic. Thus for a certain time, it successfully served as a model for our physical reality and dominated our constructs in architecture with modernist ideas that portray architecture and the city as a deterministic machine. As the complexity within our physical world increased, however, our reliance on Newtonian thought has diminished. Thus the emergence of quantum mechanics and its ability to represent our seemingly complex physical reality. While the transition from classical thought to quantum thought occurred over the 20th century in the field of physical science, it has not gone through a similar transition with regards to society’s worldview. There is a compulsory need for order and regulation within our mind set, particularly in the realm of design, and that is translated to our manifestations. Our architecture and urban designs try to force a deterministic agenda when the surrounding in terms of buildings and more so, people are indeterministic in nature. So, another type of mindset needs to be taken into consideration; one that does not seek order as an ultimatum, rather, a quantum mindset that works with chaos and all of its indistinguishable characteristics. This mindset will be evaluated and will be related to architecture and urban ideas through metaphors and models stemming from quantum theory.

Newtonian and Quantum Mindset. Whether it is due to education or social stigma, our worldview has not adopted a quantum mindset. Instead we have been in constant deliberation within a Newtonian/Classical mindset, and it is evident in our creations and ideologies. It is one that seeks a cause and effect relationship and exhibits a positivistic attitude. This can be seen in many of the products of modern architecture and urbanism. According to Ayssar Arida, Le Corbusier’s work exemplified “fanatical positivism adhered to the Newtonian mechanistic worldview” despite the scientific discourse of that time was on Einstein’s theory of relativity (Arida 8990). Le Corbusier’s vision of the Contemporary City is an example of such classical methods being put into architecture and urban design (figure 1.12). Le Corbusier envisioned the city as a deterministic machine, going further into dividing it into four functional zones: residential, recreation, work and transportation. It was an approach that had a certain outcome, but once applied to actuality if failed to meet the expectation. This shows that dealing with an urban setting is a rather complex method, and that abstracting notions of it – in a manner much akin to freezing a moment in time - to serve a specific purpose is a rigid process and does not regulate itself to an ever changing reality of the urban environment.

Figure 1.12 Contemporary City

Arida states that a Classical approach abstracts notions of reality and so reinforcing that in our architecture and city design brings forth shallow resolutions to our otherwise complex reality (Arida 90). In addition, there may have been relativistic inﬂuences during the postmodernist era as “value and meaning [lost] all absolutism”, there were still the few, such as neo-traditionalist, that enforced Newtonian thought and continue to do so (Arida 91). Thus the question becomes, how can a shift in quantum mindset occur within our society? In order to fully answer the question, one must go back to the Copenhagen Interpretation It was through the Copenhagen Interpretation were all the peculiar questions of quantum theory attempted to be answered. Due to the convoluted nature of micro particles, a statistically and probabilistic based reality, along with an interactive rather than absolute universe that depends on how the observer chooses to observe it, replaced the strict determinism and objectivity (Arida 56). The Copenhagen Interpretation went further in stating that the real world is seen as a mental construct that is shared by its different observers (Arida 57). This links to Deleuze’s concept of the virtual, and makes one question whether or view of reality is a virtual; something that is ideal and real only because we sense that is real. There are different way in pertaining a quantum mindset, particularly in architecture. Some, like Arida and John Lobell, choose to use the ideas behind quantum theory as a metaphor. Others, like Kas Oosterhuis, choose to use it in the form of computations and devising algorithms for form based designs, imagery, and behavior mapping. Whichever method is practiced, the main idea behind this to contemplate a quantum worldview; one that works with the complexities of our world.

Quantum Architecture as a Metaphor. In order to start the discourse on quantum architecture it is worth acknowledging some of the writings of John Lobell. In his paper, Quantum Theoretical Issues in Architecture, Lobell gives an overview on the difference between Newtonian physics, Einstein’s relativity, and quantum theory. He goes on to discuss the impact these scientific eras had on our worldviews, specifically on the experience of a building. He also provides examples of how quantum theory combined with different fields such as social science, consciousness, and architecture. Lobell defined quantum architecture to have the following characteristics: 12345678-

10-

It exists only if it is observed. It exists only if it is observed by a conscious entity. All part of the building exist and are experienced simultaneously. The building unfolds in multiple layers as we experience it multiple times. Its underlying logics is post-Boolean. The building unfolds from a ground of potential differently with each experience. In our path through the building, we take all possible paths. Each time we return to a room we add another layer of a parallel universe, and when we recall a previous visit to the room we reenter a previous universe. Once you have experienced one part of the building, that experience remains entangled with all other experiences of the building The building is experienced in higher dimensions, which we then reduce to three dimensions of space and one of time (Lobell)

Arida, on the other hand, focused on quantum mechanics as a set of dualities corresponding with our world view. As quantum theory would state, an electron can experience a pair of dual characteristics simultaneously, i.e a wave and a particle. Arida, shows that this phenomena can be applied within the city as well. The following table (ﬁgure 1.13) showcases examples of sets of dualities the design of a city can exhibit. For example, one important set of duality that exists within the city is the urbs and the civitas. They both deﬁne what a city is, because a city cannot thrive without either the built environment or people (Arida 78).

Either/Or: Dualism particle Newtonian physics architecture mechanical ‘thingy-ness’ building user individual solo physical space quantiity function left brain space time design by foresight utopia modern postmodern pastiche ‘Man’ first determinism private objectivity analysis linear local form mechanical body physical res extensa urbs

wave relativity planning organic ‘relating-ness’ function community society team/group cognitive space quality art right brain

And/Both: Duality particle-wave duality quantum physics urban design

‘quantum city’

time design by hindsight retrotopia postmodern/deconstruction critical regionalsim ‘Nature’ first acausal nihilism public subjectivity intuition random global meaning spiritual/purposive soul mental res cogita civitas

LEFT: Figure 1.13 Dualism Table

OPPOSITE TOP TO BOTTOM: Figure 1.14 Event A

res publica city 39

Figure 1.15 Event A and B Figure 1.16 Event ABC and Observer

Arida goes on to describe the city as a particle-wave duality through the analogy of a pebble thrown into a pond creating a ripple. The pebble is analogous to the particle while the ripple is analogous to the wave. He associates the buildings to the particle; being very discrete since it has a physical shape and can be measured. It is a quantitative aspect. The qualitative aspect of the building is its function: for example a house, school or church, have subjective characteristics. The subjectiveness is due to the fact that a particular building could mean one thing to a person but mean something else to another. Arida calls this analogy an event, shown in ﬁgure 1.14. These events can interact with one another, just like multiple pebbles and ripples can overlap and interfere with one another (Figure 1.15). Arida uses the same connotation but for bigger scales to describe multiple events. For example, many particles form clusters of buildings and their wavelike properties form a neighbourhood: Chinatown, Midtown, Soho, etc. Additionally, the waves and particles are linked with people in a manner similar to the dialectic relationship between the observer and observed in quantum theory (Figure 1.16). As Arida would put it “we are the actuators of the meaning of the environment” (Oosterhuis 53). The act of observing an element changes its characteristic based on the perception of the observer.

Arida also comprised a list of what makes quantum architecture. It is important to note that he considers the following list as means to use quantum theory as a model. The following are a few of literal mapping of ideas behind the theory that could be useful. 123-

456-

Physical is secondary: interface and information architecture can be tangible or intangible or both. Quantum does not mean virtual: even intangible architecture must interface with the real world. Architecture as (subjective/collective/knowledge) memory storage media: our current worldview is embodied in all its aspects Transdisciplinary and collaborative consciously transcends disciplinary cultural, departmental borders. Fundamentally contextual to society, space, and time Relational before formal emerges from the relationships deďŹ ned between its elements (Airda)

RIGHT:

Figure 1.20 Symmetric Indeterminate Path

OPPOSITE TOP TO BOTTOM: Figure 1.17 Determinate Path Figure 1.18 Indeterminate Path

Figure 1.19 Asymmetric Indeterminate Path

Path in a Quantum Mindset. A

One can start to decipher a difference between Newtonian and quantum thought particularly in space. Newton states that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction, but when it comes to the quantum mindset, this becomes for every action there is a probabilistic tendency to have a certain reaction. The quantum mindset sets forth a metaphor to our perceived reality. Actions do not always bring for an expected reaction. Our reality is comprised of probability and thus or experience of architecture also has probabilistic and indeterminate characteristics. For example, if we take a path in a space, say from A to B (show in ďŹ gure 1.17), the experience will always be the same. It is a deterministic experience because there is no opportunity for a change in direction and exhibiting the space in a different manner. There is a simple cause and effect, as Newton would put it, between A and B. To put path in terms of quantum theory one must introduce tendencies (other options to get to point B). For example, ďŹ gure 1.18 shows two options to get to point B, either take a or b. Each will provide the user a different experience, and this outlines an indeterminate path in its basic form. This type of path can increase in complexity and garner asymmetric and symmetric characteristics as shown in ďŹ gure 1.19 and 1.20. In order to reach to point B on goes through multiple options of path within loops a, b, c, and so on.

These pathways correlate with some of the points of John Lobell on quantum architecture. They show examples of the path unfolding into multiple layers as we experience it multiple times, and in our path through a space we could take all possible paths within this configuration. What these pathways additionally show is the level of uncertainty of the user’s experience along these routes. On cannot predict which way a person will go and how they will interact with the space. It provides flexibility, which goes along an indeterminate reality. The interior of Grand Central Station in New York allows for indeterminate actions to occur. The vast interior space with no interruptions brings forth a flexible dialogue among its users as there is not rigid requirement on how to use the space (figure 1.21).

Figure 1.21 Grand Central Station

Duality in Architecture. Taking the idea of duality into configuration of shapes bring forth imagery that could help visualize and articulate them into built form. For example if we take a square and a circle, two disparate shapes, and continuously overlay them together, a perspective starts to take shape as show in figure 1.22. However, perhaps the best example to showcase this type of duality would be the Pantheon, as it exhibits the square circle relationship in section (figure 1.23).

TOP TO BOTTOM: Figure 1.22 Duality of Shapes into Perspective Figure 1.23 Pantheon with Circle Inscribed

Conclusion. Our currently determinate mindset does not express the complexities within reality accurately. It is one of cause and effect; one needs to be able to predict outcomes. The notion of uncertainty unsettles our society, and thus keeping a Newtonian mindset seems more comfortable. Architecture and urban designs try to force a deterministic agenda when the surrounding in terms of buildings and more so, people are indeterministic in nature. The works of Archigram, Cedric Price, Lebbeus Woods, Perry Kulper, and Nat Chard show examples of ideas behind uncertainty and indeterminism in architecture. Gaining a better understanding of their work provides a useful framework to establish this thesis. Ultimately, being able to work along a chaotic setting leaves room for ďŹ&#x201A;exibility, rather than having rigid designs that will not transcend through time. Thus, a quantum mindset needs to be taken into consideration, it need not to domesticate or tame disorder but in fact embrace pandemonium.

Case Studies Archigram. Archigram interpreted uncertainty through transformation, choice and control. It is something that is “not of ﬁxed extent or character, vague, left doubtful ... Buildings with no capacity to change can only become slums or ancient monuments.” (Sadler 94) Incomplete buildings that can grow, transform and be controlled. The drawings of Trickling Towers on the opposite page illustrate the idea of how the towers morph over the years. The cyclical nature of culture and history is demonstrated through the changes in the towers (Cook 72). The drawings of Archigram provide good background on exploring indeterminism in architecture through physical change. The change in form is usually an input by the social, political, and historical needs of people and culture.

ON THIS PAGE Figure 1.24 Metamorphosis of Trickling Towers

OPPOSITE BELOW Figure 1.25 Control and Choice

Cedric Price. Cedric Price States that uncertainty needs to be addressed from the start of the design. Architecture is slow and “requires anticipatory design”, which, is “critical when the human factor is considered (Price 1996). A relationship between the architect and client with regards to uncertainty is converted to a delight in the unknown as a means to accept a building’s fate through construction, alteration, duration and demolition (Price 2003). Fun Palace is a 3-d grid where all internal components can be added subtracted or transformed (Mathews 75). It provides spatial and experiential variation. The space is not ﬁxed to an extent and thus speaks of indeterminism in a transformative point of view in a somewhat similar manner to Archigram.

RIGHT

Figure 1.26 Fun Palace Section Perspective

BOTTOM Figure 1.27 Fun Palace Plan 1

OPPOSITE BOTTOM Figure 1.28 Diagram of Fun Palace

Lebbeus Woods. The three principles of War and Architecture are outlined by Lebbeus Woods: To restore what is lost, to demolish and develop, to create the new. The effects of war present psychological effects and a change in social, political, and economic relationships. Thus a new form must be established. Forms that are different from the modernistâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s cause-andeffect conceptions of process. Forms that are not deterministic in nature, rather, speak to the chaotic spirit of the new age (Woods 10). Woods is seeks a link between architecture and indeterminism, or uncertainty. What he also demonstrates is a clear communication between idea and architecture through his drawings and models and it is important to keep this in mind for the design of this thesis.

ABOVE Figure 1.29 Radical Reconstruction 1

BELOW Figure 1.30 Radical Reconstruction 2

OPPOSITE TOP Figure 1.31 Siteline Vienna Idea Construct

OPPOSITE BOTTOM Figure 1.32 - Figure 1.34 Siteline Vienna Model 1, 2, & 3

Perry Kulper. Perry Kulper discusses uncertainty through the process of design. He utilizes indeterminism to aid with the conceptual process. Much of his drawings have a sense of ambiguity to them in order not to constrain them to speciﬁcity. There needs to be a continuous dialogue between architectural ideas through means of drawing or model making and the building. According to Kulper, “the means by which we represent architecture and the ways in which those techniques are used in the design process disclose particular values, foregrounding “weighted” ways of thinking and of putting those ideas into action.” (Chard & Kulper 14) And thus Kulper employees different innovative representation techniques to help develop the idea. The drawings are not meant to be perceived as something certain, rather it promotes a sense of ambiguity to them in order to provoke the observer to see them in different ways. It is a mindset that should be taken into consideration with the development of this thesis.

TOP TO BOTTOM Figure 1.35 Fast Twitch Perspective 1 Figure 1.36 Fast Twitch Perspective 2 Figure 1.37 Fast Twitch Perspective 3 Figure 1.38 Fast Twitch Perspective 4

OPPOSITE TOP TO BOTTOM Figure 1.39 Fast Twitch Composite Drawing 1 Figure 1.40 Fast Twitch Composite Drawing 2

Fast Twitch Site Plan

Fast Twitch Composite Drawing

Nat Chard. Nat Chard promotes a sense of ambiguity in architectural drawings to leave them open to interpretation and aid in the design process as well. “While architects would ideally take possession of the content of a drawing through interpretation, the conventions of drawing have been reﬁned to the degree that it is [by necessity] hard to interpret them in any way other than as the architect intended.” (Chard & Kulper 38). Thus interpretation allows for architectural drawings to “rehearse the wide range of pleasures outside of the predicted program.” (Chard & Kulper 38) Chard designed drawing instruments that try to incorporate uncertainty in what they draw. It initially started by folding the picture plane of the map of Amsterdam and demonstrating that due to the folds and how light and shadow falls on the map, the perception of the map is not the same in all vantage points and the map starts to have a 3-dimensional quality. These instruments are further integrated into indeterminism by splattering paint into the folded pieces, as shown in the pictures. The paint, folds, shadow and light continue the dialogue of TOP TO BOTTOM uncertainty within architecture Figure 1.41 and design. Folded Map Figure 1.42 Drawing Instrument Image 1 Figure 1.43 Drawing Instrument Image 2 Figure 1.44 Drawing Instrument Image 3

OPPOSITE TOP TO BOTTOM Figure 1.45 Drawing Instrument Image 4 Figure 1.40 Drawing Instrument Image 5

Part Two. Uncertainty|Indeterminism: Diagramming Uncertainty Uncertainty Through Imagery Field Conditions and the Derive Light and Uncertainty

Film:

Program Introduction Program Characteristics

Savannah:

Alternate Savannah Site Introduction Broughton 60x90 Broughton 30x90 Jefferson 60x90

Uncertainty | Indeterminism Diagramming Uncertainty. In order to utilize the thought behind quantum theory this thesis will attempt to explore ideas of uncertainty through particular examples. Heisenbergâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Uncertainty Principle, describes the behaviour of small particles such as light photons. It demonstrates that when the particles precision in position increases (delta x) the particles precision in momentum (delta p) has to decrease in order to satisfy a constant. An example of this is demonstrated when a laser passes through a small opening on to a screen. The laser will project the typical small circular shape as one would expect. But as the distance of the opening decreases, the precision of where the particle will be increases. Thus the particles will start to sway and the precision of its momentum will decrease and effectively explain why the shape of the laser ďŹ&#x201A;attens out as the opening becomes smaller.

Figure 2.1 Demonstration of the Uncertainty Principle with Standard Opening

One would make the prediction that as the screen closes the shape of the laser would become narrower until it is completely blocked off. However, this does not happen and these diagrams demonstrate the counterintuitive processes behind quantum thought (Muller 2013). What this entails is a sense of unpredictability within what we deem as normal events to occur. No longer can we assume for a certain kind of experience to occur. Quantum thought provides a mindset to be aware of an indeterminate nature that exists within our ďŹ xed reality. That is what this thesis aims to establish within the experience of a space.

Figure 2.2 Demonstration of the Uncertainty Principle with Narrow Opening

Uncertainty Through Imagery. The following diagrams start the experimentation on ideas of uncertainty through imagery. Existing urban form can be portrayed in terms of a quantum metaphor. The drawing shows a view of old Cairo on top of a minaret at Bab Zouela. The minarets are deďŹ ned elements along an otherwise indeterminate, chaotic/haphazard fabric of the city.

Similarly, the process of splattering paint has an uncertain characteristic. It is a mostly uncontrolled action. The only times where control intervened was to make sure the composition of the painting was aesthetically pleasing. The following set of imagery try to transform what is already defined (minarets) to the undefined (city fabric). It tries to blur the distinction between defined and undefined. When this is achieved a greater sense of ambiguity is reached. Forms relinquish their distinguishable characteristics and transform into a state of indefiniteness that is much akin to states of infinitesimally small particles. The diagrams begin to showcase a quantum metaphor, however, the question to how can one create a completely uncontrolled environment arises.

OPPOSITE Figure 2.3 Bab Zouela

OPPOSITE TOP TO BOTTOM Figure 2.4 Ink Splop Figure 2.5 Blending Figure 2.6 Obscuring

Field Conditions and the Derive. Ideas behind the quantum metaphor can also establish some significance to the discussion of program in architecture. What if the program of a space was not defined and instead developed over time by the people that inhabit it? Instead of being determined, it is left open to interpretation. The following set of diagrams explore the idea on working with a space with no “objects in the field” and how people can react to that. The term objects in the field comes from Stan Allen’s essay: Field Conditions. Allen examined how the Great Mosque of Cordoba evolved over the changes in time. He demonstrated how the columns (objects) in the space (field) helped establish a pattern to follow for the growth of the mosque (Allen 1985). The reading brought forth the question: what if one were to start off with a space that is empty on the inside; nothing for one to react to except for the 4 perimeter walls? Users can start to define the space over time, but there needs to be something within the space to react to, i.e a grid/columns. Columns create multiple pockets of space and different configurations of entry. The layout of the columns also play an important role in the reactions of the users. So a diagonal column grid would have a different effect than a regular one.

TOP TO BOTTOM Figure 2.7 Empty Room Figure 2.8 Room with Regular Grid Figure 2.9 Room with Diagonal Grid

Alternatively this could also be discussed in terms of Guy Debord’s Derive.

“In a derive one or more persons during a certain period drop their usual motives for movement and action, and let themselves be drawn by their attractions of the terrain and the encounters they ﬁnd there.” Guy Debord in the Derive (Debord 1958)

From the previous diagrams these “attractions” could be the column grid. But these geographical attractions could be other things found in the surrounding environment as well. This thesis will explore types of attractions that could range from light, materials, and form.

TOP TO BOTTOM Figure 2.10 Movement in a Field Figure 2.11 Attractor/Repeller Figure 2.12 Movement Through Attractor/Repeller

Light and Uncertainty. What if the attraction of the terrain becomes the light and shadow pattern in the space? Depending on the time of day the space is lit up in a way that dictates the movement of the people. The experience of the space is constantly changing throughout the day. The visitor is surprised to ďŹ nd new elements that was once hidden in the shadows a few hours ago. They explore this new option and that gives them an entirely different outlook of the building.

Hour 1

Hour 2

Hour 3

Hour 4

Hour 5

Hour 6

Figure 2.13 Change in Shadow Over 6 Hours

The experience of the space could continuously be different during different times of the day due to aspects of sunlight, artiďŹ cial light, and even the light coming from the outside of the building, i.e street light, car light, etc. Light can be used as an important factor to experience uncertainty within a space, especially how it interacts with the material and its shape and form. The interaction between light and a material would vary greatly depending on the form of the surface being interacted with - whether it is folded or straight. Such thoughts start to deďŹ ne a space that has the characteristics behind quantum theory.

2 1

Sun path

Figure 2.14 Experience of Space at Different Times of Day

Film Program Introduction. To prescribe a specific program to this thesis seemed to contradict the theoretical standpoint. As architects, we can only make assumptions to the usage of a building no matter how thorough programming research is conducted. However, Nat Chard’s instruments and techniques of folding picture plane and light effects brings forth similarities seen in the development of films. Can a building that exhibits films showcase such characteristic of indeterminism spatially and experientially? The connection to film provides a peculiar experience that can enhance uncertainty within a space, and provide a loosely based program for the building construct; one that is not limited or rigid, and one that allows for spontaneous interactions to occur within the spaces.

TOP LEFT TO BOTTOM RIGHT Figure 2.15 Transformative Model Image 1 Figure 2.16 Transformative Model Image 2 Figure 2.17 Transformative Model Image 3 Figure 2.18 Transformative Model Image 4

OPPOSITE Figure 2.19 Transformative-Indistinct and Static-Clear

Program Characteristics. As mentioned before light can play an important role in describing an indeterminate space. When ﬁlm light is introduced to the building it further enhances the sense of uncertainty especially with how the light interacts with the surface and the content of the ﬁlm being projected. To understand the space and it’s program, it was important to outline characteristics that could best describe the experience. Below is a diagram illustrating these descriptions and how they range form a transformative entity (one that continuously changes) to and indistinct entity (one that is obscure). The opposite is one that is static and clear.

Trans ransformati ormative Transformation Capacity to Change Addition/Subtraction Not Fixed Alteration Anticipatory Incomplete Left Doubtful Vague Open to Interpretation Ambiguous Obscure

Indistinct

Static Clear

Savannah Alternate Savannah. “Alternate Savannah” speaks of a city that eschews stagnant effects of nostalgia on a historic preservation and architectural standpoint. It is a city that accommodates to change and unpredictability of the environment by embracing pandemonium. The mindset of “Alternate Savannah” is one that adapts to abrupt changes. People do not care about visual aesthetics and do not care to demolish partially destroyed buildings; they make use of the situation to meet their current needs and will ﬁnd ways to accommodate when things change in the future. They are radical adaptors.

BOTTOM Figure 2.20 A Palimpsest of Events

OPPOSITE Figure 2.21 Embrace Pandemonium

A Rift in the Ordered System. Savannah offers an ordered system that ranges from its general layout to historic guidelines that enforce a systematic environment. On the other hand, peopleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s usage of the city is one that speaks of spontaneity and drift, or the act of derive according to Guy Debord. Derive correlates with the unpredictability behind quantum thought, and thus the focus for the design was to emphasize the idea of drifting through the interaction within architecture that evokes ambiguity. Investigations mainly focused on how one experiences uncertainty within a space, and how its translated on an urban level.

OPPOSITE: Figure 2.22 Savannah City Plan

Site Introduction. Savannahâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s ordered system offers an opportunity to introduce a sense of indeterminism within the city fabric. Thus to clearly demonstrate that, three vacant plots of land on the block of Broughton Street and Jefferson Street will be designed. The three sites will bring forth the chance for each building to inďŹ&#x201A;uence the other and the surrounding context of the city. TOP TO BOTTOM: Figure 2.23 Site Context Figure 2.24 Three Sites

Jefferson St. 3 2 1

Broughton St.

Broughton 30x90. The ďŹ rst site is the 30x90 plot on Broughton Street. It has the smallest area of the three sites and is enclosed by taller buildings than the other two sites. Thus the space feels much more tightly compact. TOP TO BOTTOM: Figure 2.25 Broughton 30x90 Context Imagery 1 Figure 2.26 Broughton 30x90 Context Imagery 2 Figure 2.27 Broughton 30x90 Context Imagery 3 Figure 2.28 Broughton 30x90 Site Section

Area: 2,600 ft2 2 74

Broughton 60x90. The second site is a 60x90 plot on Broughton Street. It is enclosed by two storey buildings thus the feeling of the area seems somewhat open. It is wider than the ďŹ rst site on the opposite site of the street. TOP TO BOTTOM: Figure 2.29 Broughton 60x90 Context Imagery 1 Figure 2.30 Broughton 60x90 Context Imagery 2 Figure 2.31 Broughton 60x90 Context Imagery 3 Figure 2.32 Broughton 60x90 Site Section

Area: 5,650 ft2 1 75

Jefferson 60x90. The third and ďŹ nal site is the 60x90 plot on Jefferson Street. Although it is roughly the same area as site two, it feels to be the most open space of the three due to the fact that it is only enclosed by one building of medium height compared to the surrounding environment. TOP TO BOTTOM: Figure 2.33 Jefferson 60x90 Context Imagery 1 Figure 2.34 Jefferson 60x90 Context Imagery 2 Figure 2.35 Jefferson 60x90 Context Imagery 3 Figure 2.36 Jefferson 60x90 Site Section

Area: 5,015 ft2 3 76

Part Three. The Indeterminate Construct: Experiencing Uncertainty The Folded Model The Folded Surface

The Site Construct: Three-Threshold Model

The Indeterminate Construct Experiencing Uncertainty. To experience uncertainty within a space, explorations on surfaces, its materials, and the light shining on it were conducted. The diagram on the right outlines the different types of folds, materials ,and light that were considered for this thesis. The direction moved towards manipulating folded surfaces to provide multiple understandings of a space due to a person’s vantage point. It also studied how different types of light were reﬂected, refracted, diffused, and absorbed through its interaction with opaque, translucent, clear, and mirrored materials. Investigations of the movement of light - particularly through means of ﬁlm projections - were also done and were important to do so in order to gain a greater degree of uncertainty within the space.

OPPOSITE TOP TO BOTTOM Figure 3.1 Folds, Materials, & Light Characteristics Figure 3.2 Folding Paper to Deﬁne Space.

Folds

Materials

Light

Straight Fragmented Angled Curved

Clear Translucent Reﬂective Absorptive

Sunlight Artiﬁcial light Film light Street light

The Folded Model. Images below demonstrate different vantage points of the folded model. It was constructed to examine the way light interacts with the surface, and the objects along the surface. The surface is reďŹ&#x201A;ective aluminum metal folded at different parts to examine the vantage points. This demonstrates how the view of the surface can be altered by folding. Once the different vantage points were overlayed on top of each other as show in the image on the right it produced a more uncertain essence. A similar effect could be conducted when superimposing ďŹ lms on the surface of a folded wall.

TOP LEFT TO BOTTOM RIGHT Figure 3.3 Folded Model Image 1 Figure 3.4 Folded Model Image 2 Figure 3.5 Folded Model Image 3 Figure 3.6 Folded Model Image 4

Folds

Materials

Light

Straight Fragmented Angled Curved

Clear Translucent Reﬂective Absorptive

Sunlight Artiﬁcial light Film light Street light TOP Figure 3.7 Folds, Materials, & Light Characteristics 2

BOTTOM Figure 3.8 Superimposed Folded Model

Fragmenting the images further increases the indeterminate qualities of the images. The interplay with the negative and positive spaces below also 3 dimensionalizes the image. Thus the studies to the right were done in order to highlight possible 3 dimensional folded surfaces.

BOTTOM Figure 3.9 Superimposed Folded Model Cutout

OPPOSITE TOP LEFT TO BOTTOM RIGHT Figure 3.10 Line Drawing of Superimposed Folded Model Figure 3.11 Combined Line Drawing and Superimposed Folded Model Figure 3.12 - 3.14 Combined Line Drawing and Superimposed Folded Model With 3 Dimensional Surface Highlighted 1, 2, & 3 Figure 3.15 Combined Highlighted Surfaces

The Folded Surface. More experimentation on the folded surfaces were constructed in model form to examine how light interacts with the surface as shown in the images below. It was important to create spaces between those folded surfaces as well. Thus, the images on the right demonstrate some examples of how the interaction between folded surfaces can create dynamic spaces depending on the direction of the folds. Adding light (day light and ďŹ lm light)

TOP LEFT TO BOTTOM LEFT Figure 3.16 Folded Surface Image 1 Figure 3.17 Folded Surface Image 2

RIGHT

and shadow further emphasizes the folds.

Figure 3.18 Folded Surface Image 3

TOP Figure 3.19 Folded Surface Drawing

TOP LEFT TO BOTTOM RIGHT Figure 3.20 Plan of Folded Surface Iteration 1 Figure 3.21 Plan of Folded Surface Iteration 2 Figure 3.22 Plan of Folded Surface Iteration 3 Figure 3.23 Isometric of Folded Surface Iteration 1 Figure 3.24 Isometric of Folded Surface Iteration 2 Figure 3.25 Isometric of Folded Surface Iteration 3

The Site Construct Three-Threshold Model As part of the design, it is important to have the three sites inďŹ&#x201A;uence one another along with the surrounding context. Thus further model studies were created to understand the relationship between the three sites and explore methods to connect them with their surroundings. While some physical attributes of the sites are different, there is a similar language between the three. The the idea behind the three-threshold model is to diagram three rigid structures (the sites) with an ever changing folded element (the indeterminate construct) passing through them.

BOTTOM LEFT TO RIGHT Figure 3.26 Three-Threshold Model Vantage Point 1 Figure 3.27 Three-Threshold Model Vantage Point 2

OPPOSITE TOP TO BOTTOM Figure 3.28 Three-Threshold Model Overview Figure 3.29 Superimposing Vantage Points of Three-Threshold Model

Part Four. The Building Construct Part I:

Experimental Premise 30x90 Broughton Street Building 60x90 Broughton Street Building 60x90 Jefferson Street Building

The Building Construct Part II:

Improved Experimental Premise Orthographic Drawings 30x90 Broughton Street Building 60x90 Broughton Street Building 60x90 Jefferson Street Building

The Building Construct Part I Experimental Premise. The process involved creating a series of designs meant to explore uncertainty within architecture. Each series provided a platform to further develop the theory. The models and drawings presented prior showcase the manipulation of folds to start creating spaces. They either folded vertically, relating to walls, or horizontally, relating to floors. The perspectives and orthographic drawings in the coming pages illustrate using the findings from the folded experiments to intervene each individual site. Each building exhibits and projects film onto the folded surfaces, whether it is the floor or roof.

ABOVE Figure 4.1 Southwest Isometric of First Iteration

30x90 Broughton Street Building. 30x90 Broughton has one large folded surface that runs diagonally through the site. It acts as the major wall with different projections to experience on each floor. The folds of the major wall has opening in specific areas of the building to act as thresholds for people and allow an existing leftover elevator shaft on the site to run through all three levels. Thus visitors of the building can experience the folds as they pass through doors or climb up and down the stairs. The floor system is made up of translucent glass blocks with a brick system dividing the grid. Some of the glass blocks are removed in certain areas to allow sunlight to pass through the floors and hit the surfaces in unique ways.

W Broughton Street

W Broughton Lane B

N 93

ABOVE Figure 4.2 First Floor Plan of 30x90 Broughton (First Iteration)

The glass blocks should also glow with light (daylight, artificial light, or film light) due to its translucency. Due to the folds, lights and materials, the experience of the spaces are continuously dynamic and exhibit uncertain characteristics as one cannot pinpoint a definite environment of the space. The structural grid follows a rational logic and proportions of the surrounding context. On the exterior, people can see reflections of the interior experiences. This is an attempt to connect the indeterminate quality of the building to the street level.

W Broughton Street

W Broughton Lane B

N 94

ABOVE Figure 4.3 Third Floor Plan of 30x90 Broughton (First Iteration)

TOP TO BOTTOM Figure 4.4 Exterior Perspective of 30x90 Broughton (First Iteration)

Figure 4.5 Section A of 30x90 Broughton (First Iteration)

TOP TO BOTTOM Figure 4.6 Interior Perspective of 30x90 Broughton (First Iteration)

Figure 4.7 Section B of 30x90 Broughton (First Iteration)

60x90 Broughton Street Building. Since 60x90 Broughton has a wider site than 30x90 Broughton there are more folded surfaces. There are two major folded surfaces that run across the northsouth axis of the site. Both surfaces continuously fold up multiple levels, however, the surface on the east side folds onto itself and terminates on Broughton street instead of congress lane. There is some uncertainty to determine what is wall and roof with these folded surfaces. The structural grid follows the same pattern as the previous building. Steel frames support a brick screen facade system to allow sunlight to pass through and the folded surfaces as well in order to provide lateral stability.

OPPOSITE TOP RIGHT Figure 4.9 Second Floor Plan of 60x90 Broughton (First Iteration)

W Congress Lane

A W Broughton Street

ABOVE Figure 4.8 First Floor Plan of 60x90 Broughton (First Iteration)

B W Congress Lane

W Broughton Street W Congress Lane

A W Broughton Street

ABOVE Figure 4.10 Third Floor Plan of 60x90 Broughton (First Iteration)

TOP TO BOTTOM Figure 4.11 Interior Perspective of 60x90 Broughton (First Iteration)

Figure 4.12 Section A of 60x90 Broughton (First Iteration)

TOP TO BOTTOM Figure 4.13 Exterior Perspective of 60x90 Broughton (First Iteration)

Figure 4.14 Section B of 60x90 Broughton (First Iteration)

100

60x90 Jefferson Street Building. 60x90 Jefferson has a more open characteristic to the site than the others, thus the folds are experienced in more of a urban/pavilion setting than the other two sites. It provides another way of experiencing the projections of the ďŹ lms and light onto these surfaces. The ďŹ&#x201A;oors and roof fold onto one another creating a series of ramps and providing different layers of shade patterns throughout the day. They are supported by a similar grid system of steel rod columns that also contain light sources within them. There are a few spots in the building that serve as a lookout to the surrounding.

Jefferson Street

W Congress Lane

ABOVE Figure 4.15 First Floor Plan of 60x90 Jefferson (First Iteration)

101

Jefferson Street

W Congress Lane B

ABOVE Figure 4.16 Second Floor Plan of 60x90 Jefferson (First Iteration)

102

TOP TO BOTTOM Figure 4.17 Interior Perspective of 60x90 Jefferson (First Iteration)

Figure 4.18 Section A of 60x90 Jefferson (First Iteration)

103

TOP TO BOTTOM Figure 4.19 Exterior Perspective of 60x90 Jefferson (First Iteration)

Figure 4.20 Section B of 60x90 Jefferson (First Iteration)

104

The Building Construct Part II Improved Experimental Premise. The previous series of design experimented on the ideas of the folds and projections well on each building separately. There was not connection between each site however, and as a result, each building became isolated within the physical boundaries of each site. Thus, it was clear to take these unique experiences and blend them across the three sites on Broughton and Jefferson street to form a cohesive piece. Part of the failings of the previous design was that many various elements, i.e. glass blocks, brickscreen wall, steel rod columns, gave a disjointed appearance on a whole. This issue was resolved in this iteration as the design took a much simpler, yet much more dynamic and indeterminate approach. The simplicity of the elements emphasizes the complexity behind the folded surfaces as it spans and breaches the boundaries of Broughton and Jefferson Street.

105

ABOVE Figure 4.21 Southwest Isometric of Second Iteration

106

Orthographic Drawings. Drawings of the second iteration demonstrate the uniďŹ cation of all three buildings and the relationship with the urban setting. They highlight the folds on the interior and exterior, particularly in the section. As the previous scheme, the ďŹ lms will be exhibited and projects all over the folded surfaces on each building. Finally, it is important to note that all the drawings attempt to represent an uncertain/indeterminate quality to them. As part of the idea behind this thesis, presenting and understanding these drawings should be part of the characteristics behind the quantum mindset previously explained in the research.

ABOVE Figure 4.22 Section A of Three Building Constructs

107

ABOVE Figure 4.23 Section B of Three Building Constructs

108

W Congress Lane

W Broughton Street

W Broughton Lane ABOVE

ABOVE

Figure 4.24 First Floor of Three Building Constructs

Figure 4.25 Second Floor of Three Building Constructs

109

ABOVE

Figure 4.26 Third Floor of Three Building Constructs

Figure 4.27 Fourth Floor of Three Building Constructs

110

30x90 Broughton Building

W Congress Lane

W Broughton Street

W Broughton Lane ABOVE Figure 1.28 Location Key Diagram 1

TOP LEFT TO BOTTOM LEFT: Figure 1.29 Interior Perspective 1 of 30x90 Broughton (Second Iteration) Figure 1.30 Exterior Perspective of 30x90 Broughton (Second Iteration)

112

ON THIS PAGE Figure 1.31 Interior Perspective 2 of 30x90 Broughton (Second Iteration)

60x90 Broughton Street Building

ON THIS PAGE Figure 1.32 Exterior Perspective of 60x90 Broughton (Second Iteration)

ABOVE Figure 1.33 Location Key Diagram 2

TOP LEFT TO BOTTOM LEFT: Figure 1.34 Interior Perspective 1 of 60x90 Broughton (Second Iteration) Figure 1.35 Interior Perspective of 60x90 Broughton (Second Iteration)

118

60x90 Jefferson Street Building

ABOVE Figure 1.36 Location Key Diagram 3

TOP LEFT TO BOTTOM LEFT: Figure 1.37 Exterior Perspective 1 of 60x90 Jefferson (Second Iteration) Figure 1.38 Exterior Perspective 2 of 60x90 Jefferson (Second Iteration)

120

Conclusion The Quantum Construct Summary and Future Studies

121

122

The Quantum Construct Summary and Future Studies. Incorporating indeterminacy and uncertainty into the experience of a space provided a good start to understanding the quantum construct via architecture. The usage of film offered a programmatic element to the space because it assimilated thoughts behind uncertainty particularly well. Layers of film projections always evoke an ambiguous feel to the space and so it was important to capture and highlight that essence. The manipulation of surfaces into different folds allowing light and film projections to interact with a careful selection of materials exemplified that quality. And due to the nature of the building construct, those characteristics advanced into the urban surrounding and set the scene for the city of Savannah to address the quantum construct. Manifesting ideas behind quantum theory into physical objects such as buildings, can help build the basis towards a quantum mindset. Having something to reflect upon can develop an understanding of issues that are unfamiliar. It provides an effecting dialogue between presenting the idea and incorporating the idea into our constructed reality. It is important to conduct more tangible constructs from other fields to improve upon the discussion. Through architecture, it provided an outlet of expression within the experience of the space. However, that is not the only possible way to express such thoughts and it is up to further experiments to uncover the possibilities. Due to the years of research and development of quantum physics, this thesis offers a glimpse of what quantum architecture could entail. Further experimentation will improve upon the thoughts and ideas of a quantum construct. The idea behind experimentation is not to confirm the validity of the theory, but in fact, it is to highlight it’s deficiencies in order to develop and discover.

123

124

Appendix Supplementary Images: Final Boards

125

126

Supplementary Images Final Boards RIGHT

The Indeterminate Construct:

A Quantum Metaphor of Architectural form, space and Experience

The Site Construct:

A Rift in the ordered system of Savannah

To express ideas of uncertainty - through the philosophy behind quantum theory - in architectural form, space, and experience.

The city’s ordered grid provides a strong contrast to any indeterminate construct, which can only exist when its assimilated to a determinate condition.

Worldviews shape an understanding of our reality and provide a foundation to how societies think and implement. It is no question that the scientific revolution sculpted the framework of our environment throughout the industrial revolution up till the early stages of modernism. However, the current scientific model does not match the mindset of today’s society. There is comfort in seeking order and regulation yet our reality is much more complex than that. Quantum theory is seen as neither a realist, causal, nor deterministic ideology. It corresponds to a higher degree of intricacy; one that does not have the rational mentality of classical theory. This thesis will look into how scientific theory, specifically through the philosophy behind quantum physics, can serve as a model to embody an architectural design and provide a means to express our indeterminate reality. It challenges notions of a prescribed program and site, and seeks to investigate ideas of uncertainty in design through manipulation of architectural form, light, material, and experience.

Savannah offers an ordered system that ranges from its general layout to historic guidelines that enforce a systematic environment. On the other hand, people’s usage of the city is one that speaks of spontaneity and drift, or the act of derive according to Guy Debord. “In a derive, one or more persons during a certain period drop their usual motives for movement and action, and let themselves be drawn by their attractions of the terrain and the encounters they find there.” Derive correlates with the unpredictability behind quantum thought, and thus the focus for the design was to emphasize the idea of drifting through the interaction with architecture that evokes ambiguity. Investigations mainly focused on how one experiences uncertainty within a space, and how its translated on an urban level. The direction moved towards manipulating folded surfaces to provide multiple understandings of a space due to a person’s vantage point. It also studied how light reflects, refracts, and diffuses through its interaction with opaque, translucent, clear, and mirrored materials. Investigations of the movement of light - particularly through means of film projections - were also done

Figure A.1 Final Exhibition Board 1

OPPOSITE: Figure A.2 Final Exhibition Board 2

The Experimental Premise: A trial and error process

Experimentation does not confirm the validity of a theory, but in fact, it highlights deficiencies in order to develop. The process involved creating a series of designs meant to explore uncertainty within architecture. Each series provided a platform to further develop the theory and will continue to do so for the next iterations. The models and drawings on the right showcase the manipulation of folds to start creating spaces. They either folded vertically, relating to walls, or horizontally, relating to ﬂoors. The perspectives below illustrates using the ﬁndings from the folded experiments to intervene each individual site. Thus, it was clear to take these unique experiences and blend them across the three sites on Broughton street to form a cohesive piece.

The Building Construct:

An exhibition of Indeterminism through means of drawing “The conventions of drawing have been refined to the degree that it is [by necessity] hard to interpret them in any way other than as the architect intended.” - Nat Chard To prescribe a specific program to this thesis seemed to contradict the theoretical standpoint. As architects, we can only make assumptions to the usage of a building no matter how thorough programming research is conducted. However, the connection to film provides a peculiar experience that can enhance uncertainty within a space, and provide a loosely based program for the building construct; one that is not limited or rigid, and one that allows for spontaneous interactions to occur within the spaces. It becomes a place where one can view film exhibitions, and

because of the folding of the form, usage of material, and its interaction with different modes of light (sunlight, artificial lights, street lights, film lights) provide a multitude of experiences that are not quite defined. The space is not meant to serve a specific purpose, and just as the drawings presented, they are meant to bring forth different interpretations of an experience. They are meant to raise ambiguity, uncertainty and indeterminacy through the act of experiencing the drawings. They are meant to exhibit the quantum construct.

Khaled Riad | Professor Reno | Thesis Studio | Spring 2014.

Ground Floor

Second Floor

Third Floor

Fourth Floor

View View 8 5

Section A

Section B

Works Cited Albert, David. Quantum Mechanics and Experience. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press. 1992. Print. Allen, Stan. Field Conditions. Points and Lines. New York: Princeton Architectural Press. 1985. Print. Arida, Ayssar. Quantum City. Oxford, UK: Oxford Architectural Press. 2002. Print. Butterﬁeld, Jeremy. Fleming, Gordan N. Quantum Theory and the Mind. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplementary Volumes. vol 69. 1995. pp 113-173. Print. Chard, Nat. Kulper, Perry. Fathoming the Unfathomable: Archival Ghosts + Paradoxical Shadows. Pamphlet Architecture 34. New York: Princeton Architectural Press. 2014. Print. Cook, Peter. Arcadia: Peter Cook, Trickling Towers. A+U: Architecture and Urbanism. No. 113. Tokyo, Japan: A+U Publishing Co. Feb. 1980. pp 72 - 75. Print. Debord, Guy. Theory of the Derive. International Situationniste. No 2. Writing: 32, rue de la Montagne-Genevieve, Paris: 1958. Print. Deleuze, Gilles. Guattari, Felix. What is Philosophy? New York: Columbia University Press. 1994. Print. Deutsch, David. The Fabric of Reality. New York: Penguin Books. 1997. Print. Giedion, Sigfried. Space, Time and Architecture: The Growth of a New Tradition. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press. 1941. Print. Hall, Edward T. The hidden Dimension. New York: Anchor Books Editions. 1990. Print. Lobell, John. Quantum Theoretical Issues in Architecture: It’s a lot stranger than we Think. Brooklyn NY: Pratt University Tarp Architecture Manual. Fall 2003. Print. Matthews, Stanley. The Fun Palace: Cedric Price’s Experiment in Architecture and Technology. Technoetic Arts: A Journal of Speculative Research. Vol 3. Number 2. Bristol: Intellect LTD. 2005. Print. Muller, Derek. Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle Explained. Veritasium, Youtube. Youtube. January 14. 2013. Web. Date accessed Jan 27 2014.

129

Oosterhuis, Kas. Feng, Han. Xia, Xin. iA#4: Quantum Architecture. Heijningen: Jap Same Books. 2011. Print. Pallasmaa, Juhani. The Eyes of the Skin: Architecture and the Senses. Chichester: Wiley Academy. 2005. Print. Plotnitsky, Arkady: Chaosmologies: Quantum Field Theory, Chaos and Thought in Deleuze and Guattariâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s What is Philosophy? Paragraph: a Journal of Modern Critical Thinking. vol 29. number 2. Jul. 2006. pp 40-56. Print. Price, Cedric. Anticipating the Unexpected: Cedric Price Special Issue. Architects Journal. 1996 Web. Date accessed Jan 27 2014. Price, Cedric. The Square Book. Chichester: Wiley Academy. 2003. Print. Sadler, Simon. Archigram: Architecture without Architecture. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2005. Print Shlain, Leonard. Art and Physics: Parallel Visions in Space, Time, and Light. New York: William Morrow. 1991. Print. Verhulst, Ferdinand. The Validation of Metaphor. In Validation of Simulation. Eds. Van Dijkum, C., DeTombe, D., and Van Kuijk, E., SISWO Publication 403. Amsterdam. pp 30-45. Woods, Lebbeus. War and Architecture. Pamphlet Architecture 15. New York: Princeton Architectural Press. 1993. Print.

130