Mercredi 15 août 2007 3 15 /08 /Août /2007 14:36

spaces forces forms flows

INTRODUCTION
“The theory of the form "taught at the School of the BAUHAUS had followers until Latin America.
Our professor of architecture, Henri CIRIANI, left his country, Peru, at the end of the Sixties, and in a didactic way this discipline restored us which thus never completely disappeared.
Formed to follow the evolution of the forms and spaces in architecture, it is at the end of the Eighties, that I wondered for the first time about the possible applications of this discipline in cosmology.
Walking me close to the station St Lazare, I initially considered a limit which moved, then I took a reversed image of cosmos, (to privilege the vacuum) bubbles in a soft body bordered by a crust, with the following idea: If the limit between the empty bubbles and the full soft body is frank, the universe is bordered by a crust.
However the edge of the universe isn’t a crust it seems? and nobody could affirm me that there was an indivisible particle, infinitesimal part of the matter.
(Science and Future Nov./DEC 97, J.Mr. ALIMI, Astrophysicien at the Observatory of Meudon proposes an image which takes into account the scale of the galaxies as a whole allowing a continuity of full and vacuums overlapping which satisfies better the remarks developed in this text).
Little time afterwards, I read the book of S. Hawkins with a persistent idea. Why did a universe “limited without end” evoke it and described it origin like a closed system? Why the universe it would not be limited without end of any share?
Ghost with my preceding investigations, I realized later that it was necessary to reverse the proposal until the end.
That gave planets in a space rather close to the vacuum bordered by a vacuum emptier than the precedent probably compensated by intense fluctuations. The crust also had its negative.
There did not need more frank limit between full and vacuum, it could exist an edge of the universe avoiding the question of beyond that. The universe generates its own context.
For me, that did not plead in favour of an infinitesimal indivisible particle of the matter, even if the matter and the vacuum are of different nature.
(The principle of exclusion prohibited to 2 material particles to be in the same place whereas 2 interactive particles (particle of the vacuum) can it. This concept immediately allured me because it placed the vacuum in the centre of the system).
Several years after, at the time of a wedding service in Laguiole, after having read an article employing the “elastic” word, I thought for the first time of putting in parallel the property of expansion of the universe and character fluctuating the possible of the edge of the universe with his possible share of autonomy.
Previously I established a correspondence in a chronology ternary of different states, full, empty, edge putting the vacuum at the centre of all things. There it was a question of generalizing the idea that all in the universe is extensible, included  the matter.
Thus the infinite one became a local property and everywhere at the same time, very distant from the hereafter, and which one could plan to describe the mechanism.
“The infinite one is on the shoulder of my neighbour, was my first intuition ".
I would conclude my introduction by evoking the property from “not recursivity” evoked by the mathematician Penrose.
Intuitively, I think that this property qualifies rather well what divides the 2 complementary worlds mentioned above.
That consisted of bubbles in a soft body bordered of a crust and universe.
This “division” or this “passage” is the topic of this text and my work of architect.
Walking in front of the Cook villa, to Boulogne 12 years after having left the school I realize of the difficulty which we had to analyze architecture. This normal period of training did not enable us to apprehend globality. The obsession of our teacher to refuse any formalism and  all recipes, required us of perseverance.
The principal error of judgment relating to modernity is undoubtedly systematically to associate it the concept “speed and of expressivity” and to consider dissymmetry like a new dogma. For as much we were conscious that there was an order in this new manner of conceiving space.
“To build the vacuum “is a beautiful formula, but that is not natural, a long training is necessary so that our way of structuring the vacuum definitively carries it on a purely sculptural design of architecture.
My file joint with this text, written after my studies is the assessment of this training of the design of space.
In the prolongation of this file, there are 4 fields who interest me, the impact of vibratory movements, the description of the scaling in space (threshold of inversion of scale), concept of polarization who integrates the preceding one and the process of evolution by taking architecture like model.
These 4 topics are integrated, in my opinion, in an overall process.
1 EVOLUTION
The world seems to roll in the same circle but this circle is a spiral which always rises. (History of the Romans - Victor DURUY)
It is by systematically photocopying the majority of the reviews and books of Architecture that I became aware of this permanence of the movement of pendulum who characterizes the evolution in this field. That the humanistic ones reassure that does not destroy the role of the individual. The evolution nead the means of the individuals. The individual nourished collective knowledge, the mechanism of exchange is permanent and the exceptions in cycle evolution confirm the rule. (Persistence of bunches “traditional“ during one time with dominant ”baroque“ with all the tendencies  possible intermediaries).
The term of pendulum can actually lend to confusion because the arrow of time is not reversed, I would say
that there is 2 cyclic dimensions and 1 dimension in evolution.
(Conflict in space between symmetry point and axiality of the space subjected to vibrations, prohibited the reversibility of time, see conclusion of the text).
It seems that the tendencies alternated with bursting or with integration forms and their spaces are done increasingly extreme and more and more rapids. Actually I think this mechanism of alternation is constant in the duration but it breaks up  in under increasingly brought closer sets. With a certain scale the evolution can seem being linear.
(For certain person, the recent resurgence of conflicts and epidemics discredits the idea of a “end of the history”. For me, it is this permanence of these mechanisms which could have killed the history).
In the same order of idea, if you analyze the progression which characterizes the “sonata with the moonlight“ you realize that the topic is not simply repetitive.  All the parts are overlapping. A singular note of the beginning announces the medium of the piece and the fall.  
(The movement is internal, the curve braces the construction, the system is recurring).
Architecture can be sometimes revealed of a blow as with the Pantheon in Rome. The music, even coherent as a whole is a succession of measurements made up of notes or agreements. The superposition of several notes gives an agreement, the superposition of silences does not exist, only their duration can be prolonged.
This overlap of the notes and silences characterizes the evolution of a piece.
Moroever it context, never identical, influences the evolution of architecture. The context influences the actors, those influence more and more the context, the 2 form the same entity. I do not oppose nature to the man and its capacity of abstraction, the 2 form our world. conscience of the cyclic process evolution does not allow one unlimited acceleration progress. On the other hand it supports significant jumps of this evolution.
Gravity of the history, gravity of the knowledge, recurrence phenomena supports of the evolution.
Example of rational inscription in the chronology of the history of architecture
BALDEWEG, (Spanish architect, see file) by reinstating in its manner the cupolas flattened of the architect
19th SLOANE, proposes an identifiable space in a fluid unit.
To fix space thus reinstates a typical approach of past architecture which requires an effort curiously.
That does not have anything naturalness at first sight. This step is in fact the base of all “revolution” in architecture. Bruneleschi, Palladio, Le Corbusier are turned over to the sources.
Modernity – abstraction : There are no pure systems a priori - any system can find its balance.
The bursting of the forms is with the measurement of the quantity of material implemented .
The simple forms can be poor or integrate an internal sophistication.
There is an architecture “baroque“ pure as it can exist a “traditional“ architecture exempt of contents. Paradoxically at “the pre modern ones” or “decadents” the bursting is apparent and peripheral (Theo Van Doesburg, precursor of architecture cubist, primarily destroyed the external volume of its constructions). Those which one describes as revolutionists like Corbusier, disturb the heart of their compositions and recreate a coherent unit (registered in a simple figure or not in reaction and/or symbiosis with the context).
Architecture purist and minimalist of Le Corbusier do not represent degree 0 of architecture. He purified the external and apparent forms of its buildings while integrating the beginning of an intern volumetric sophistication unequalled before. By comparison, the provocation of the white sheet of certain painters appears futile, it acted exactly of the trap of modernity.
 
EXTRAPOLATIONS
It is into 1978 that I tried to apply this design of the evolution to other fields. Whereas I was in the vicinity of Orly I wondered whether the future engines of plane would use again propellers. My father who worked in aeronautics assure me that there were studies in this direction in the USA. The motivations were economic, and perhaps it is the fall in the price of the oil which returned this research without object.
It is interesting to note that the shape of these propellers was completely different from their ancestors, they became “baroques”, heavy etc…  It was not a regression, but a new synthesis.
 
In another way, I was interested in Spanish architecture, then completely ignored, by finding reviews of this country at the University of Berkley in 1980. However I think that each point of the sphere has a singular “colouring” and that evolution nourished these particularisms.
It seems to me in addition that North-South contrast is stronger than East-West contrast. Thus,
in 1987, I indicated, following successive deductions, that the countries of north were going to play an important part. I was thus not astonished when a few times later the bookshop of the Monitor devoted its front to works concerning Swedish architecture.
At the same time, I indicated the northern border of Finland and I employed the expression “finlandisation of the USSR". I was unaware of the existence of the Baltic States.
Deviated southern northern evolution. Principle of exclusion - the evolution can be done with difficulty in all the directions at the same time - cold materials or heats - cold colors or heats - certain criteria can be superimposed in a way complementary to others cannot it, at least on a certain level of synthesis. 
(The earth being spherical, one can say that there are all possible colourings. With a certain scale one can consider that the points in the medium of the ocean are reconstituted on average insofar as the continents are sufficiently dispersed to be representative of the various climates. If the ground were larger each point would become a circle. There is no limit with the evolution. Each point becomes a cone.
 
DETERMINISM
Following a readingrelating to the equations of Lorentz, I drew a figure which resembled a wheelbarrow.
The wheel was the source, the vat resembled a volume expanding regular and the curved handles represented lines which stretch space.
Thus, by comparison, if the trajectories of the particles are probabilists, I associate a volume expanding regular it. I tend to consider that the regularity in 3D confers one coherence with the unit, even if the particles can borrow ways which all are not inevitably finalized and relevant. They traverse “the Universe of Possible”.
 
In an imbricated system, the architect can control the whole until the coherence of the details by some
specific controls. Either we draw until finding a solution which appears coherent to us, or we
let us imagine a space which we then represent with a minimum of useless layouts. In all the case we
let us be brought to  to make corrections. The first method is sometimes striking, the second can be more virtuoso since imagination is not attached by the means of representation.
The fact to not finding immediately a solution coherent does not mean that our preliminary layouts are the fruit of chance, I think that they are conditioned by our environment.
The passage of the 2D with the 3D appears essential to me. One can summarize by proposing an unspecified whole in a determined one etc... Actually I think that our vocabulary is unsuited.
A probabilistic whole in a determined unit produced it a vaster unit, determined?
The scientifics like the philosophers admitted that the earth was not the center of the universe, for as much any opposite excess privileging the thesis of the absolute chance, making disorder a new dogma is in my opinion an error which constitutes a form of vanity again.
“The order” and symmetry also exist at the modern time, it is to us to approach these concepts in a way more abstracted and disconnected from any mystical value (mysticism which can exist besides without the centrality).
The architects know that anything of destroyed symmetry better than 2 shifted symmetries.
Finally it seems to me that duration only cannot explain our universe. The probability so that a monkey does not press its elbow on the keyboard of a typewriter with brought closer intervals is null even for an infinite time. Time has a form associated with dilation with the universe.
If a mathematical model is always needed, as Thom requires it, I think that it must integrate a level of
fluctuations for which the framework of the current probabilities is unsuited.
 
COMPLEMENTARITY
Rome, for example would be a geographical and climatic singularity compared to the time of its apogee. Opposite sum, to some extent, of the “cruel” people which surround it. Rome would have been used as catalyst of the Area, being located at the centre and everywhere. This complementarity is also exerted in time.
Moreover there is undoubtedly a sparing relationship between dimension and life. The man is perhaps the smallest as possible. Is clay, for example a resistant material if one manufactures it in a proportion easy to realize and to implement at the hand (is this coincidence?). The use of brick in the modern architects answers
with a step where intervenes of the psychological criteria possibly stripped of any traditional connotation and very required constructive.
Cosmological constancy makes me think of ice floe going up on the surface of water while being diluted but the universe its own context generates  context + species = context general (integration by compression)
The rolling up of protein it is coming from interior or in osmosis with the context?
The chameleon does not change a color solely by will, need, practice or adaptation but by complementarity in the chains.
One puts sometimes this insoluble question which hen or egg initiates the species?
This problem of anteriority is not it not a problem of space (time), which included the other?
Can be exists it male elements and elements females like it exist the particles + and -, it would be the absence of this duality or complementarity which would be insupportable to consider. The genesis is exerted can be initially by simple contact + and -, inclusion, the third dimension becomes a need at one time of the process towards the life. There would be thus a process towards the life. A world monolith is unimaginable, it is a world still-born.
This process of the genesis of the species presents, to a certain extent, of the similarities with that of the creation of new materials by various accumulations and overlaps.
Does the centripetal shape of the receptacle of egg generates it centripetal forces supporting the centrifugal forces of the development? Even if I regard the complementarity centripetal forces/centrifugal forces as very creative, my answer is rather reserved before finding a new synthesis. Imagine the Eiffel Tower like orbiting station, perhaps it would forms a crescent? Which is the role exact of the context? I would say that it is the place of exchange.
One could speak in this case about symbiosis (complementarity without force). (as water is diluted in water; Borges).  The influence of FLOWS, forces resulting is undoubtedly preponderant.
The modern ones exaggerated this concept of force, which ended up becoming a recipe in the painters for example; force = gesture = expressivity. I prefer the emotion caused by calculation in Piero Della Francesca (control of space). The forces compensated by flows fall under a complex space system.
 
2 POLARIZATION
Opposite characters - a seemingly calm person can be a highly-strung person contained opposed to an irritated person. There is dominant characters, but an individual consists of a multitude of sometimes contradictory features of characters seemingly. 2 opposite individuals can have points which bring them closer.
For as much these opposite characters answer my opinion with description that I consider for the polarized systems.
There is continuity within a multidimensional framework. But on a certain scale there are 2 classes of individuals who in a certain manner seem to belong to 2 different worlds.
(Diagram following page)
For two individuals with opposite characters corresponds 2 lines of distinct characters AB and CD
which way traversed in space by the “ticket” so that in a plan, 2 of the poles of these lines are opposed and the 2 others meet.
When one spread the ticket so that the 2 lines AB and CD are found in 2 perpendicular plans,
- One notices a new intermediate line EFF. EFF is the line of character of a new individual produces of the 2 precedents.
- It is noticed on the one hand that the 2 spaces induced between AB/EFF and CD/EFF have opposite orientations. Thus one can say overall (3D) that 2 individuals are opposed, then that in detail (2D) they are opposed on certain points and approach on others. (Without it being about similarity, it can be a question of intelligence at one and intuition at the other for example).
- It is noticed then that F belongs to the line CD and that E is apart from any pre-existent line.
That lets suppose that there exists at a new individual of the stable elements of natures taken at one of the parents and others which are create. Thus certain features of characters persists, they seem to remain intact with the wire of the generations (Creation without dilution).
(In reality it seems that progress of hygiene and medicine causes to attenuate the morphological singularities).
To compare with the equation of Lorentz: Stable elements - elements in evolution = evolution
EFF slightly deviated compared to symmetry = non reversible.
 
 
                                        
3 SPACES FORCES FORMS FLOWS - THRESHOLD OF INVERSION OF SCALE
The observation of the axonometric sights of the Villa “La Roche” (current foundation Corbusier) has me used as principal support for the whole of this text.
The plan of this villa translated the concerns of this time, never the concept of space time was not so systematic application of manner in architecture.
I try to show in these lines that in my opinion the organization of the villa “La Roche” anticipates largely compared to the current concepts, in particular those of “chaos” (description of the singular mechanisms of changes of states in a continuous system).
Chaos: confusion of the Elements before the creation of the world. . Confusion, disorder.                                                                                                                         
The base of the theory of chaos does not reside perhaps in common interpretation of this word synonymous with
disorder. This definition corroborates my assumption according to which chaos describes as much the phenomena of degeneration, which those of genesis. Descriptions which the specialists make of chaos associate in my opinion that with the concept of “passage”, appreciated by contemporary painters.
“Passage“ for painters, is used like a letter that one insert by compression, in a word on a screen.  It is about a geometrical means of   to give depth, by prohibiting any form of expressivity. (“folds” of the Feigenbaum mathematician). Paradoxically chaos would not be synonymous with rupture, but contrary to continuity.                                                                             
The villa the Rock (presented following pages) seems to be the place of integration of 4 complementary concepts: MAGNETICS SPACES/TENSIONS/FORMS/FLOWS = SPACES/FORCES /FORMS/FLOWS
This house of a pictures collector is organized according to a plan at right angles.
We can describe the principal space of entry as being centrifugal in centripetal cube with the angles open and the opaque sides in a cube to the closed angles and the open sides (or the reverse indifferently).
One should not imagine the interior cube surrounded by a peripheral volume. The 2 are overlapping.
The originator dilates and compresses the 2 cubes at the same time until finding the balance of each space and of the unit.
The picture gallery develops on the other part of the square. It is composed of a curved wall bordering a slope, the other side is right. The slope is obviously the place of FLOWS.
The link with the space of entry makes the square, space is narrowed at this place. The staircase seems to be the prolongation of the slope in the space of entry. Thus circulations slope/staircase creates the bond between the 2 parts.
 
To simplify, I would say that the villa associates a dilated cube (sphere) a deformed cone laid out on both sides of a square whose junction, spaces compressed time is the origin of the orthogonal system.
Thus the cone (here curves + straight), is a “turned up” space located on the other side of the origin but which acts on the space of the sphere.
The contour of this figure points out to me the figures of Klein as well as the figures generally associated chaos.
It seems to me that one finds such configurations in various organizations. The contour of a foetus for example :
A mathematician of Mulhouse carried out objects articulated out of metal which showed how a space could be turned up by keeping the continuity of contour and spaces. It thus described the chaotic character of the development of the stomach in the embryo.
It seems to me that one finds of such figure in the organization of the universe.
The expanding universe would integrate forces of concentration permanently even if we observe the total expansion of the system. (centripetal/centrifugal).
The cone (shift curves/straight) would be the hidden part of the universe, the beam and can be the spark of the system. (This hidden part can be superimposed on the observable universe and to be of the same order as the black holes.) The origin, very compressed with the intersection is never summarized in a point.
In this system, I associate MAGNETIC SPACE and SPACE, FORCE and ENERGY, (tension in architecture),
FORM and MATERIAL, FLOW and TIME. (It remains to find the place of the GRAVITATION).
FLOWS play a determining part. Dependent on shifts in space, they prohibit the total closing of space by maintaining a minimum space which explains why the origin cannot be limited in a point.
These flows are the complements of intrinsic energies. This system appears me to be in agreement with the principle of exclusion.
 
THE BRAIN
This combination Spaces/forces/forms/flows as well as the concept of scale appear determining to me to describe the difference between the human brain and the animal brain.
The criterion would not be simply the mass of the brain but the distribution of the vacuums supporting about, flows, the intensity (forces) and finally the form.
Thus the size of the brain would not be the only parameter to be able to reason, it would be the adequacy of the various preceding parameters which would be in question.
I would take again then centripetal expression “centripetal, centrifuges deviated” (which is not completely superposable or symmetrical), with the subjacent idea which there is an internal mass and an external mass of the brain.
Concept of inversion of scale being able to explain that there is a certain apparent similarity between the human and animal brain and a radical difference when with the performances (difference in nature beyond a certain threshold in the distribution empties/intensity/form/flow).
The idea of the “not recursivity” evoked by the Penrose mathematician appears adapted to the difference which characterizes the distribution of the vacuums and the masses, as well as energies inside the human and animal brain. This would translate a difference even more radical.
 
(Foot-note : Science and life 2005 N°1058 “We have a second brain” This article confirms my intuition. Andrea Volterra highlights the astrocytes place of chemical reactions (and nonneuronal) which interact with the neurons via the synapses).
 
 
THRESHOLD OF INVERSION OF SCALE
At this level of this text, I suggest taking again my file concerning architecture.
This phenomenon of threshold of inversion of scale was described at the end of the Seventies by the architect V. Gregotti (Directing of the Casabella review) in its book “the territory of architecture” (see at the end of my file).
In Architecture, the same figure (made subsets overlapping) simply dilated or narrowed will produce at a time given one threshold of inversion of scale “without there being intervention of the scalpel of the surgeon” to paraphrase the Penrose mathematician.  These phenomena apparently in rupture are continuous.
(inversion of total orientation, or knowing passage of the scale more specific of a house to an urban scale than a place is not a simple dilation of a stay, this dilation produces at one time of the radical structural changes. for example on an urban scale the horizon tends to move away modifying the impact radically from our interventions).
In Athens, the columns of the Erechthéion temple are sculptures of women.
The compression of a spiral does not produce the same effect in the centre and the periphery
The effect believes in an exponential way when one approaches the centre - saturation - need for the 3D.
Some figures with “male” or “female” tendency imbricating males or females subsets.
 
To note how by digging a space one can reverse the tendency without using expressive means.
How the pointillist resolution of a line can reverse the general orientation of overlapping spaces.
The concept threshold of inversion of scale within the framework of a unit made up of “SPACES, FORCES, FORMS and FLOWS appears me to be a determining data.
                                                                                                                           _________________________________________FORCES                                  FORM                                                                                                           
                                                                                                 (tension)               (matter)  curve/straight
Image1a.png
 
     Image1ab.png Image1c.png







                                 
                                                                    FLUX tightening of space time
SPACE centripète/centrifuge – expansion/concentration (same side from origine)
Open/shuted angles – open/shuted side 


Image6.png  
                    
 
4 VIBRATIONS - RESONANCE
Object: sand grains
When P.G. de Gennes presented at  B.Pivot the experiment of the sand grains ( the sand grains concentrate in the center under the effect of a vibrating plate), I tried to apply the criteria to it used in our discipline, (influence of the context, spaces, form, material, continuity, tension, scale, threshold of inversion of scale, etc).I wondered at the time if under certain conditions, the grains of sand were not going to flee the centre.
An article of J.P. Troadec, Professor at the University of Rennes and E. Directing Guyon of the School of Normal Sup, Sciences and Future, December 94/Jan 95 NR°99, confirmed my intuition.
If the sand grains gather in the centre by effect of mass or group, it seems to me that the concept of edge is not indifferent, some would be surrounded   by their similar, others would be in peripheral situation. However I note that while shaking my limps of sawdust of pencil scattered, the convergence of movement whatever the position of the sawdust is immediate. It seems to me that the grains which move all worms the same central point all are opposed and translate actually the same vertical orientation, with the image of movement of the bacteria on the surface of the ground. It is the agreement of the movement which characterizes the vibratory effect.
For me the sand grains should jump on the spot. But as the columns of the Parthenon are bent at the ends to correct the effect of the prospect, I think that one would need very complex experimental conditions to produce such an apparently neutral situation.
                                                                                               
In this almost perfect experiment the centre represents for me “no choice”, I call it the 5th edge by defect and I thus associate the idea of vacuum. In architecture, in the case of hierarchical continuous spaces 2 by 2, a centred figure is not inevitably closed. It is about a particular case of superposition of spaces in opposition to an overlap of those along a line.
Take a 8, to even fold up it on him, you obtain a polarized figure whose poles meet, the centrality exists only from one certain point of view. The junction is only apparent - no contact - particular case of open spaces.
  The situation in the event of acceleration of the vibration is with the first experiment what the Baroque is with the Traditional one, (alternation “bursting - integration”).
In this experiment there is opposition between a concentrated figure and a figure pointillist with a uniform distribution of the sand heaps which correspond to a reduction of the centres, knowing that in the beginning I consider that the position of the grains can be indifferent and that the nature of the vibratory movement is determining. Any centre (cosmology).
With the scale of the sand grains we pass easily slow speeds at fast speeds however the idea of a perceptible threshold appears probable to me. Although it is not essential on a sand grain scale the existence of such a even embryonic intermediate movement would have the appearance of a model to describe the threshold which shares integration and the bursting.
According to the conditions of the experiment, other variations can possibly appear, such as chaotic movements of the sand grains or such as their propulsion in space.
With other scales, the apparent order or the centrality would actually correspond to very unstable singular situations in systems where the vibrations and the masses would have effects of reciprocity.
 
COINCIDENCE                                At the time of a lunch a friend asked me the following question:
To find the ray of a circle C2 whose centre is with the periphery of a circle C1 so that the surface included at the same time in the 2 circles is = to the 1/2 surface of the circle C1.
My first intuition was to draw an absurd solution, a circle C1’ of ray = R1 = to the ray of the circle C1, the surface of inclusion of the 2 circles being included in the half-surface of the circle C1 is thus smaller.
Then I drew a circle approaching the solution apparently
 
I noted following coincidence then: draw the cord with the intersection of the circle C1 and C1' having for radius = half R1 it cord is the height of an equilateral triangle of with dimensions = R1. Prolong with dimensions equilateral triangle = R1 with dimension  R proposed as probable solution, you will find then a point located on the tangent of the circle C1 drawing a new equilateral triangle homothetic of the first with height = R1.I initially noted that the 2 1/2 cords, heights of these 2 triangles were very brought closer.
This singular solution induced a ray R required: R = R1/cos 30    =     R1/0,866     =      1,154 R1
By the continuation I drew another solution as absurd as first, R passing by the diameter of C1 with a half surfaces of C1 included in the surface of inclusion of the 2 circles obligatorily larger.
I then drew a circle whose radius was the average of the 2 absurd solutions, this solution seems again bad. I then drew the average between the preceding average and the first absurd solution (R = R1) this solution seems still bad.
(the solution right amounts finding a S1 surface = S2 (see diagrams), it seems that when one moves away slightly from the solution right surfaces S1 and S2 are very disproportionate).
By against the average of the 2 average preceding ones seems to be the solution right.
The average between 2 absurd solutions is a absurd solution the average between the preceding average and an initial solution absurdity R = R1 is a absurd solution.
The average of the averages, the average of the averages of 1st and 2nd generation is a solution right.  
        
Conclusion
The evolution of very disproportionate surfaces S1 S2 when one moves away from the solution of balance could describe, in my opinion, the situation of the poles and the nodes (passage, origin, etc..) that mean singular situations.
This exercise shows whereas the origin as well as the poles fit in chains which thus precedes them and follows them. The origin and the poles exist well in as long as entities, as soon as one moves away from the origin or about the pole it is not any more an origin or a pole. (On the other hand the origin as the poles have without doubt a thickness, spaces vacuum, one would say today that they are fractals).
However in this exercise the intersection of S1 and S2 is a point, but my diagrams are limited to a perception in plan. It is then necessary to imagine the circles on stages different like the stages from pedals. That brings me closer to perception that I have polarization which I describe as “polarization on floor”
The second remark relates to the proximity of the cords such as I described them above. For me which practises the guitar, that or not recalls me the expression being in phase. Thus in the solution right I would say that the cords are in resonances, which would suppose that we are in a system which points out that of the vibratory movements.  The 2 relatively brought closer cords coincide with equal surfaces S1 S2 the exercise puts in parallel a sinusoidal figure and a linear figure.
I point out that the initial objective of the exercise is to compare a surface bordered by 2 arcs of circles with a surface bordered by an arc of circle and a line. That amounts comparing the passage of a line with a curve.
(A the Villa the Rock space beyond the node, is bordered by a curve and a line shifted, as if the tension of the 2 produced at a given time this tightening which constitutes the original node, leading to centripetal space, centrifuges on the other side of the square. To notice that this exercise in 2D shows how one passes from a state to another without using the scalpel of the surgeon ". Surface of 2 circles, passage of a surface limited by a curve on a surface limited by a line.
Image9.png
Image8.png
Par Fabrice LEFEBVRE du PREY - Publié dans : space forces forms flows
Ecrire un commentaire - Voir les 0 commentaires
Mardi 14 août 2007 2 14 /08 /Août /2007 14:53

conclusion

CONCLUSION
When at the end of the Eighties I started with tried to apply to cosmology, the concepts specific to space such that we practise it in architecture, I used the Villa the ROCK as model
A dilated volume on a side corresponding to the expanding universe, a throttling of space on the level of the square, origin not closed of the system, and a stretched space made up of a curve and a line, on the other side of the origin; left rolled up space following the assumption that the universe has its “counterpart” invisible within the framework of an open system.  (As there are black holes)
I associated 4 complementary data it, “FIELDS, FORCES, FORM, FLOW” which seemed me to be a generalisable combination of any dynamic system imbricating matter and vacuum.
Concept of “threshold of inversion of scale“, proposed by the architect V. GREGOTTI in the Seventies seemed to me to apply to this passage between 2 spaces located on both sides of the origin.
Dilation, compression, stretching of space.
Dilated space corresponds, for me, with the figure into 8 which I already used, kind of overlap of 2 spheres.
Stretched space is associated a cone actually made up of a shifted curve and a line.
The unit represents, in my opinion, a chaotic figure which would be also the diagrammatic figure of infinite that I presented in my introduction like a concrete mechanism. The unit forms a deformed and compressed figure of 8 but. This combination imbricates sets with male” and “female” tendency “. As in architecture, spaces and the forms tend towards these 2 extremes with possibilities of inversion of tendency under development of spaces. To remove an element for example can make fall over the whole.
The axonometric representation of the Villa La ROCHE shows us a system “polarized with degree“(which develops in space with several levels thus solving problems of continuity and autonomy of the parts impossible to solve in 2D. The third dimension is a need placing the vacuum in the centre of the system.
This diagram (of the Villa La ROCHE) shows that the poles, which are singularities, fit in a chain.
On right-hand side and on the left of the pole, it is not any more the pole. The pole is specific, singular and yet it falls under a continuous unit. There is no contradiction. The pole, him also endergo the elasticity of the system.
Poles or fringes, function like the origin. The awakening of their dilation (or contraction) own modifies calculations which take into account the globality of the system, they readjust space permanently. The fringes influential on the origin and vice versa, within the framework of the total dilation of the system. (If the origin is scanned at the edge, in this case the fringes are everywhere).
 
GRAVITATION
When I read the book of S. Hawking, theoretical research went on possible descriptions of the starter of the universe. The choices that one proposed to us, that they are symmetrical or not, always passed by a point.
Hawking raised the problem of the unification of the gravitation to the other forces, wondering why the gravitation did not involve the collapse of the electrons on the core. The “principle of exclusion” of PAULI seemed a beginning of response not clearly marked in this work which obviously did not privilege yet the role of the vacuum.
As I wrote in my introduction, my reaction was to apply the expression “limited without end” of S. Hawking at the origin of the universe like to the infinitely small one. Because indeed, the principle of exclusion appears me to be an extremely powerful phenomenon. The saturation of spaces, leads us in architecture to rebalance them while inserting transparencies within the walls which we brought closer. We saturate space beforehand by holding account that there will be later readjustments, essential with the balance of our compositions. Alternation bursting integration of spaces with always of the tendencies dominant, centered or stretched, female or male etc.. is one of the keys of our discipline.
With the reading of the work of S. Hawking in 1990, I substituted the “gravitational” expression suitable for the gravitation by ”centripetal centrifuges deviated“ integrating at once the idea that the gravitation could generate repelling powers.
Those were evoked by Hawking, but not integrated in a total and continuous system.
Of same it seems to me that the phenomena of compression are present in the expanding universe (can be by the means of the black holes), it also seems to me that the centrifugal forces related to the gravitation are present at the cosmic scale, the 2 phenomena are integrated. (I use for my electric guitar a compressor who booste the sound).
As I indicated in my text, we spoke in centripetal architecture of space in centrifugal
(in centripetal) etc.. or conversely. We considered besides, compared to the treatment of the angles and the open or closed sides, like a simple convention.
It is as I imagine the gravitation, with a dominant tendency according to whether one describes the gravitation within cosmos or of the atom.
The expression “deviated” holds account owing to the fact that the centrality is only one particular case often dependent on an incomplete perception of reality. The centripetal , centrifugal forces are not exactly as a balloon which one inflates or deflates, but fall under a directed system, dynamic.
Foot-note
It seems that contradiction between Einstein and Oppenheimer on gravitational collapse was a non-problem, since an apparent singularity is not synonymous with discontinuity.
The history gave reason to Oppenheimer on the existence of the black holes. The model of Einstein, left deviated compression caused to close space excluding any singularity of the type “hole black”.
However, just as it is shown as the threshold of gravitational collapse is not a singularity (i.e. not closed), one can also say that the model of Einstein does not lead obligatorily to a closing of space such as it wished it.
From any way, the principle of non recursivity evoked by Penrose, does not exclude, it seems to me, that the laws of physics are amended in the extreme situations, which does not withdraw anything with their universality. Just as relativity did not invalidate the laws of Newton on a problem scale as they were supposed to solve.
Thus, if it is understood that a matter concentration that constitutes planets forms in a symmetrical way, spherical, I have a certain difficulty in imagine a dynamic space, such as a black hole, symmetrical and radial, kind of negative of the star which formed it. I prefer, a priori, a model that I would qualify the “centripetal one, centrifuges deviated”, corresponding to the cone deformed described above for during universe.
To simplify, I would propose a spherical universe integrated into a hyperbolic whole in rotation, integrated him even into a not closed sphere (figure).
In the whole of this text, I always used the same configuration
genetics          stable elements  +  evolutionary elements   =          whole evolutionary (non reversible)
                        context + species                                 =          CONTEXT
                        determined in unspecified                   =          together evolutionary
gravitation         centripetal in centrifugal                   =          centrifuge (or centripetal)
( the force centripetal centrifugal are destroyed within a first framework but fall under a vaster gravitational unit representing possibly opposite additional movements according to whether it apply to the particles or cosmos, this solution makes it possible to integrate the centrifugal forces into the gravitation).
spherical universe in hyperbolic                 =          opened (“limited without end ")   
                        relativity in chaotic             =          recurring
My intuition, as I indicated several times was that the “big bang" was the place of a threshold of inversion of scale where the centrifugal forces of expansion were compensated by a rolled up system, drawn bar, reversed in a total system centrifuges in centripetal in centrifugal. The centrifugal forces became centripetal. (All the chronology of the Roman churches follow this mechanism  space lengthened for the Romance time, centered with the rebirth then centered stretched by using an oval plan for Baroque architecture , etc..).
Hawking, in addition established already a parallelism between the hypothetical description of the “big-bang” and that of the edge of a black hole. Still abstract phenomenon, but more accessible than the first portions from second of the big bang.
The article of Mr. Abramowicz (FOR SCIENCE, July 1997) shows how the centrifugal forces in the gravitational field of a black hole are directed towards the centre. There is inversion between interior and outside.
This description describes in a precise way exactly the intuition that I had with the reading of the book of Hawking by applying my knowledge of architectural space to the “big-bang” and who seemed, according to the author, to also apply at the edge of the black holes. This article seems to confirm this concept of “threshold of inversion of scale” described by the architect V. Gregotti. That tends to consolidate me in the idea that it is about a phenomenon much more universal and powerful that a simple reversal within the framework of a geometry of Rieman. These phenomena of inversion which I associate chaos is undoubtedly a considerable source of energy. It could thus be a question of a pre-inflationnaire model.
Laurent Nottale, Astrophysicist at CNRS at the Observatory of Meudon, described in a very precise way the role of the scale in the relation between quantum mechanics and relativity “The relativity of scale” published in “For Science " NR °215 Seven 95 and July 97 except series “black holes".
Personally, I am not able to dissociate the centrifugal forces of the gravitational forces.  For me, when the centrifugal forces and centripetal are cancelled, it is about gravitation within the framework of general relativity (curved space).
 
The additional centrifugal forces are the forces added (centrifugal in centripetal in centrifugal etc..).
One can wonder for which reason the first portions of seconds of the beginning of the universe would not be represented by a force directed of outside towards the interior a little as a small baloon for artery which one would apply to the big-bang.
Ambiguity external interior evoked by Mr. Abramowicz is a basic concept in architecture. The essence of the work of space is exerted interior towards outside but as I indicated, the centripetal/centrifugal forces are exerted overall in the 2 directions with a dominant tendency.
As I proposed for the question of the emergence of egg or hen, we are not in the presence of a simple problem of anteriority but rather of inclusion a space-time problem which would be summarized in fact with a duality as the wave/particle.
Thus the first moments of the big-bang would coarsely represent an open sphere and in detail a form comparable with the Villa La Roche, it is with being said a “anticentre”.
These first portions of seconds would be on both sides big-bang in a space in form of 8 and would integrate also a stretched cone. (integration by compression, 2 in 1)
By analogy, it is necessary to refer to the article of S. Haroche, J.Mr. Raimond and Mr. Brown “Research” N°301 September 97 on the paradox of the slits of Young. 
The article of R. Ikonicoff Science and Vie N°964 Jan 98 on the identical reactions of a couple of photons distant from 10km gives can be arguments with this space design of the big-bang described above.
That would tend to confirm this idea that infinite the very far away one from the concept of distance, rather related to the design of space such as would be described Heidegger  Space is to make place. That would imply that the coupled particles that one separates always belong to same under unit. That obligatorily does not imply to imagine speeds higher than that of the light to explain this identity of reaction.
The coupled photons would react as the angles of a centrifugal centripetal space react together because they belong to the same dilated space.
Fusion N°69 jan/fe 98 article of David Cherry, Chuck Stevens and Emmanuel Attic
The physicists Borge Nodland and John Malston substitute the concept speed of the light by that of plans of polarization, they evoke the organization of the galaxies in walls intersected with vacuums, the space which separate them being periodic.
 
ANY CENTRE
Hawking compares the expanding universe with a balloon which one inflates, with objects on surface deviating
from each other, it employed the expression “any centre” to correct the misleading effect of this image.
With this reading, it seemed to me that certain galaxies could deviate from each other in the same direction general or in opposite direction. Thus an isotropic universe was to be perceived as anisotropic unless there is in all the directions of the very distant galaxies and others relatively close. (it can exist for example a very distant galaxy having an orientation similar to our, and a close galaxy having a direction opposed to our. It seemed to me that the expression “any centre” supposed additional movements so that the galaxies deviate really all from/to each other. This concept is not neutral.
That does not withdraw anything with the accuracy thesis Hubble, but its description east can be incomplete.
The villa the Rock or the Cook villa of Corbusier is good models to define the expression “any centre”.
The figures which soutendent them, of chaotic type, evacuate the centre by shifting hierarchical axialities.
The paradox of these constructions (which put out of cage the centre or releases it) is that they constitute in is a polarized zone ending up resembling at a very sophisticated thick centre undoubtedly.
In any way the evolution passes by extreme phases of bursting and integration. It seems to me that one will be able to always announce the disorder as model when the vice is tightened without taking much risk.
 
REVERSIBILITY OF TIME
My first intuition on the subject was as follows        
To open then to close an umbrella is not the reversibility of time. The reversibility of time would consist in trying to close again 2 umbrellas in directions opposed like 2 half-spheres joined by their bases.
By against if one of these half-spheres is consisted an umbrella raised by the wind, that becomes possible.
This image modifies the initial conditions; the open umbrella before being deformed is reversed in centrifugal centripetal term but with a similar general orientation.
This structure seems a double structure (if not more). If the reversibility of time consists in resticking the pieces of a cup, that lies within the scope of a simple and local structure.
Before being based, the whales of the deformed umbrella would pass by a line. That brings back for us to the exercise “coincidences” describes higher. It seems to me that the relation of the space which I described as “during” universe (that one can compare with a black hole) and universe present of the similarities with the 2 circles of the exercise. That would mean that they become in certain extreme situations, almost equivalent.
The exercise of “coincidences” shows to leave “singular orbits” such as R = R1 or R passing by
diameter of C1 etc. a series of average intermediate orbits which can produce situations very
singular like R = 1,154 R1 place in my opinion of the threshold of inversion of scale.
(I would wish on this subject that specialists check if there is such a singularity with R = 1,154 of the accretion disc of a black hole compared to the tenjante)
However these orbits are “axialities derived” from the initial solutions R = R1 and R passing by the diameter of C1.
This game of recurrence of the various axialities is in my opinion an important point in the structuring of spaces as the diagram of the Villa Cook shows it at the end of this text.
The jump of an orbit to another is one of the keys of  the non reversibility of time the more so as the vibratory movements, evoked about the sand grains are probably determining.
These vibratory movements explain the expression “any centre” developed with the preceding chapter.
Image10.png                   
 
This kind of breathing can be slowed down or accelerated, but the vibratory movement, alternated essentially, cannot be reversed. The threshold of inversion of scale falls under a continuous movement general.
That is not sufficient to explain non the reversibility of time; my second intuition was as follows
The reversibility of time would be like wanting to dismount a house of cards while starting with bottom, without causing the collapse of the unit.
It is absurd a priori, the reversibility of time would be rather to dismount it by the top. However I think paradoxically that this last assumption falls under a continuous time.
The reversibility of time would be in fact to dismount a house of cards by the top by considering that the top became the base within the new framework of a space reversed time.
In a certain manner the reversibility of time returns to try to design the universe in a “big crunch”.
It is not only reversibility of the time which is inconceivable but well time present likely to become reversible. This universe is death born.
(One can imagine within the framework of the balancing of the centripetal centrifugal forces a cyclic universe in which the centripetal forces would end up dominating with a continuous orientation. Such dominant same centripetal forces could have consequences which return them unstable and transformed instantaneously into centrifugal overall movement comparable with the big-bang.)
The non reversible universe brings us to the property of the structuring of a space recurring, braced.
 
 
STRUCTURING SPACE
As I indicated the Eiffel tower is a good model of braced system. But concerning space, the diagonals of wind-bracing should not be materialized. Those are induced.
The vacuum is helped of the matter as the Hermit-crab is useful itself of an empty shell.
For us, architects, matérialisation of the diagonals kills space by creating insuperable barriers.
They kill continuity. These diagonals create functional short cuts by creating residual spaces.
(My file on architecture gives some elements on the way in which structure a space.)
To think the vacuum in priority radically modifies our way of imagining the articulation of the elements which constitute space.
THE SCREEN
An article of P. Loubière - Sciences and Future N° 2667 Jan 98 evokes the tendency of certain physicists and mathematicians such as A. Ashtekar, J. Baez, J. Lewandowski or P. Hadid to be left the screen spaces/time (“connection without metric ").
It is difficult for us architects to imagine this problem because we work freely compared to the screen that we fix ourselves. The screen serves to us as revealing of the choices which we operate, in particular in term of concentration or dilation of space.
In return of this freedom compared to the screen, we have the requirement to give a direction to each spacing compared to that and by this skew between the components of our spaces in order to ensure perenniality of it. This requirement often brings back for us on the screen, because too many uncontrolled deformations destroy the direction that we had given to our actions. Knowing that for us, the objective parameter is the man.
(However at the time of an operation within a framework existing outstanding, our intervention can be pressed on a screen completely disconnected from the screen induced by the context. It is well the problem of the connection which is in question.)
There is no limit with the complexification of our spaces, but that asks for an effort of control of the recurring effects proportional to the number and type of deformations.
By pragmatism, I always approached work on space starting from a preliminary matter concentration.
Our teacher rather evoked a completely transparent and continuous space in which we operated some opacities intended to qualify by treating on a hierarchical basis them of particular spaces.
For me all the difficulty is to establish the threshold between a relativistic world which describes an overall movement (a world transparent and smooth seemingly in which some opaque concentrations are exerted) and a world which starts from these opacities which will invade the universe and will structure the vacuum until making it recurring.
(By dint of trying to reconcile the irreconcilable one, my teacher said that one would see me one day arriving at the school with a rigid matter jacket with very flexible handles).
I do not think that there is contradiction, because ultimately our projects had more opacity than of transparency and paradoxically the quality of the vacuum became an all the more determining property about it.
The vacuum and space are not the same concept, the vacuum alone is unimportant. In some kind, space is gained on the vacuum while resting on the full one. As I indicated, space exists by need. Thus the expansion of the universe, i.e. the movement is not that the consequence of space is not vacuum.
Space is dedicated to dilate and progressively has the winds-bracing not materialized but induced by the matter with its expansion. The article of J.Mr. Alimi quoted in introduction, goes in my opinion in the direction of a total coherence in the distribution of full and the vacuums who supports a mechanical approach of the system. 
That brings us to the ambiguity mentioned above between outside and the interior. That would be exerted everywhere, at the atomic and cosmic level. This concept would join that of ambiguity wave/particle and to the principle exclusion would bring back for us.
The concept of threshold of inversion of scale would be also exerted between the atomic nucleus on the level of the quantum gravitation compared to the gravitation on the relativistic scale. The bond between the 2 would be thus of chaotic type to the direction where I described it in this text. This phenomenon would be exerted within the framework of all the involved forces, not in a direct but recurring way. At the same time local phenomenon  and total in which the fringes play a determining part all the same.
(The energy of chaos would be the bound energy on the re-establishment of continuity in the process of deflagration in chains).
That leads me to imagine a relativistic and recurring paradoxical universe.
As I noted in my introduction, my first reading on cosmology was the book of S. Hawking.
With the thirtieth reading, I always wondered why the author did not use the expression “limited without end” for the infinitely small one or for the big-bang. It was exactly the thesis developed in the 2nd work that I approached   “The man and the Cosmos” of J. Barrow, F Tiplet and Mr.O. Mondricourt, edition Imago.
During 3 consecutive years, from 90 to 93, this alternation of new assumptions and news
confirmations did not cease. In 96, when I undertook this working, I stopped any reading almost
up to one recent time. 30/02/98 at the time to conclude, afterwards  hesitation, I found in the NR ¡42 of the books of Science and Life, December 97, an article of A. Barberousse entitled “scaling” with a passage devoted to the “theorem of recurrence” of Poincarré. This article explains how the adversaries of Boltzmann used this theorem against “statistical mechanics”.
That does not have inflects my feeling compared to the recurrence. In any event, to marry the recurrence and relativity is paradoxical, and can appear antiquated. The point of view that I proposed for the evolution however consolidates me in this way. I think that the studies of P. Hadid of J. Baez and of A. Hashtekar “to leave the screen” should make it possible to raise this paradox.
It is singular that one used the theorem of Poincarré, initiator of relativity to try to disqualify statistical mechanics, bases quantum mechanics. Personally, I referred to the recurrence more like mode of growth that like principle of return to the source. I hard limestone the recurrence with the concept of chronology of specific scales.
However this other approach of the recurrence supports my matter since it binds the mode of growth to the mode of creation, i.e. in the beginning. As I evoked on several occasions in connection with polarization, really it is not a question of one return to the box departure; neither reversibility nor cycle. It can be a question of a relative bringing together in a figure which I developed with the Villa the Rock. I thus integrate the 2 components of the recurrence; mode of growth and its polarized system.
The singularities which are the poles distinguish in the chains as can be distinguished balance and instability or the bubbles in a soft body bordered by a crust and the universe.
  Copie-de-Image11.png
Axiality of the land : average 1ère génération – created axiality : average 2e génération
Conflict of 2 axialities : unstable balance, no statique / average of several average = right solution
Image4a.png
Par Fabrice LEFEBVRE du PREY - Publié dans : space forces forms flows
Ecrire un commentaire - Voir les 0 commentaires
Lundi 13 août 2007 1 13 /08 /Août /2007 15:01

complement and texts of reference

June 2003:
After having built several buildings, I find again interest for cosmology.
The texts published recently in the review Science and Life seem to confirm the intuition that I had in the Nineties in my text completed in 1998 according to which what one taught us at the School of Architecture on the manner of structuring the vacuum and especially of giving him a dominating role, gained the field of physics more and more.
In 1998 the publications on the theory of the cords were increasingly numerous and I thought to the time that one would need also a theory of the “sail” what the physicists call of the “bran”.
I am obviously not a physicist, on the other hand I understand my language and the intended texts to a public as me are well adapted. It is necessary to interpret what I write, on the other hand I think that there is a discussion thread in the whole of this text and also of the completely erroneous remarks obviously, of the inconsistencies and contradictions but in a field where those reabsorb sometimes with time.
I thank the physicists who agree to read it. I am sure only of one thing, the vacuum is well in the heart of the debate.
I now will write a certain number of things following the number June 1029, 2003 of Science and Vie devoted to the energy of the vacuum which can appear aberrant to you. But it is without consequences and without claim and especially my professor of architecture learned to me has not to seek with very taken the sensational one. The text which follows is I think coherent with my preceding text.
It is said that the energy of the vacuum would have according to calculations considerable being and yet this one is not observable and this energy does not seem to undergo the curve of the universe under the action of general relativity.
I wonder whether the energy of the vacuum does not undergo the curve of the universe it east can be because this energy is not in our observable universe but in what one begins has to call the pre big-bang  (or beyond the big-bang because my point of view is rather space).
As I had considered in my text the pre big-bang would be big-bang on both sides.
I think that this energy undergoes the effects of general relativity but that those are different beyond the big-bang, which I call in a short manner “the threshold of inversion of scale”.
The general relativity applied to the energy of the vacuum which is for me a vibratory energy would produce beyond the big-bang of the straightness. The existence of this line is described in my initial text and remains associated with curves.
The characteristic of the vibratory movement would be to be rectilinear (see my text on the sand grains on a vibrating plate), general relativity beyond the big-bang is not opposed to it or could restore this straightness.
Ultimately can the theory of the cords east be only the general relativity applied beyond the big bang?
The universe does not have a centre and yet the representation that one in fact is always centred.
I tend to think that any formalism should be avoided, a random universe seems to me as formal as a centred and symmetrical universe. I chose in my text for a slightly centred universe deviated or almost centred. Almost is an open opening.
To destroy the centrality it sometimes happens to me to imagine moving the big-bang on the level of the largest oval of the expanding universe within the framework of a continuous system.
As I wrote at the beginning of my text our professors of architecture spoke of space times influenced by the physicists of their generation. It is thus normal that very quickly I believed without too much believing in it to evacuate the question of knowing what occurred beyond the universe by imagining a limit which moves. Before that becomes a debate it is said that this question was not paused at the beginning of research of Einstein who answered initially unfavourably the expansion of the universe.
But today I tend to say that a lengthened man who breathes is not moving, therefore the scale factor returns can be in line of account.
In addition the fact of blocking a parameter arbitrarily is not the base of any revolutionary invention.
For example Bernard d' Espagnat who explains that there is no infinitesimal particle of the matter evokes in his book “buckled reality” the law of large numbers in this “kind of determinism statistical” which would compensate for “the intrinsic indeterminism” of quantum mechanics. For me the law of the great numbers is too traditional compared to the description that Bernard d'Espagnat made of the atom. But once again I am not a physicist.
 
Einstein revolutionizes the design of the universe starting from a closed and erroneous design of a universe not expanding, as if the fact of blocking a parameter had allowed the creation of its theory, (relativity would be the residual but total movement system after blocking of the borders). It is undoubtedly this error on the total scale which limits the range of the theory on a quantum scale.
  
Bernard d' Espagnat would make the reverse, his description of the atom published in an article that I found a long time after his publication appeared to me fulgurating however in his book “buckled reality” the atomic nucleus would be associated law of the great numbers which constitutes in my opinion an escape ahead by too “modern” dated and finally too traditional. For me the universe is almost centred and almost closed, it is simply “open” in its design.
It is open as architecture is transparent what has nothing to do with the fact of seeing with through but which qualifies its understandable character, perceptible or at least felt within the framework of a walk. (And the walk is probably not finished).     
I evoked in my text the role of the principle of exclusion of PAULI and especially it principle of no recursivity evoked by PENROSE.
The chronology of the vacuums and full do not produce total and symmetrical inversions systems. The particles can become antiparticles but the molecules do not become antimolécules. This difference in effect compared to the chronology holds as I explained to nature different from full and the vacuum compared to the scale considered i.e. even if the vacuum is always the starting element.  
Empty spheres in a soft body bordered by a crust (see the beginning of my text). Planets or stars in a more or less empty space bordered by a vacuum emptier than the preceding vacuum zone of intense fluctuations. To formulate with more precision my matter I would say than on a binary scale empty spheres in a soft body is well the negative one massive bodies in a relatively empty space. With the ternary scale on the other hand the crust is not the density absolute or infinite and its negative is not the absolute vacuum. Thus symmetry does not function any more on a ternary scale. Thus the negative one of the crust becomes the intense zone of fluctuation, chaos or the transcendence? 
I would say today by referring to the recurrence of Poincaré that the edge of the universe known is captive of what surrounds it. Very concentrates there, “the centre”, the edge and information.
Beyond I would say that the infinite one is with the brain what the colour is with the eye, just a question of temperature (the 0 Kelvin degree being inaccessible).
 
March 2005:
In 1990 by reading the book of S. Hawking “A short history of time”. I was astonished by the way in which the author treated the infinitely large one differently and the infinitely small one. (A universe limited without end and a system closed for the infinitely small one).
Coarsely at the time for S. Hawking no information could come out from a black hole, a closed system we can say. Today S. Hawking would cancel its thesis of the time, information resulting from the black holes could come to us and according to the articles which I read and in fact there would be no part hidden beyond of the black holes.
While referring to me with a small text that I wrote on intersections of circle (see in my text joint), interest of the work of S. Hawking would be to have described two opposed extreme solutions.
I explain in my text how the principle of “threshold of inversion of scale” describes by the architect V. Gregotti in the middle of years 75 coincides with the description of the Abramowicz physicist (For Science 97) explaining how the centrifugal forces at the edge of a black hole are directed towards the centre.
 
Taking into consideration my text mentioned above on the circles and taking into account the fact that according to J.P Luminet (Science and life Fev 05) one can estimate the ray of a black hole, I always hoped that a physicist or a mathematician agrees to check by calculation if there is not a singularity “like a threshold of inversion of scale” to 1.154 of the ray of a black hole (R/COS 30).
(Or of the modification of trajectory of the elements located at the edge of a black hole when their radiation reaches a ray = 1.154 of the ray of the black hole). Is the black hole represented like a cone, but the edge of a black hole east can be itself a cone (but in which direction?).
Always in reference to my text on the circles, I propose to consider the two proposals of S. Hawking the old one according to which no information of spring of a black hole and the news which cancels the preceding one as the terminals of the system. My proposal would be, always in reference to my text on the circles to take again the old calculation considered as erroneous and to make a kind of arithmetic mean with the mode of recent calculation. It is not a question of a synthesis within the meaning of Heisenberg (see last page) but to define an undoubtedly false solution. Then I propose to make the average of the new proposal which results from this with the last solution adopted by S. Hawking. My intuition since is that the quantity of information which comes out from a black hole is important but not supplements (put 85% or 98.5%). It is about a form of synthesis by successive iterations in 2 phases can be a kind of calculation by the absurdity? I thank the specialists for accepting to interpret this text and to adapt it to reality. (My first intuition was that the quantity of information which came out from a black hole was weak (put 15% or 1.5% by making the average enter calculation old and the average of the 2 extreme solutions). No matter it is the concept of the edge we have to consider
   
While passing recently close to the collegial one of Sémur in Auxois during the songs, I thought at the time or I realized, thanks to my professor of architecture, to which point this field was practically inaccessible. I said myself that there was can be a parallel between this singularity with 1.154 of a ray initial and this angle that Ciriani had required of me to propose for 2 urban buildings which I had drawn. At the time and like I describes it in my text on architecture, I had proposed an angle of 15° by supporting me on observations which I had made 3 months earlier concerning the plan of Michel Ange for the Place of Capitole and the arcades in front of Saint Pierre.  
I know well that to compare an angle and a cosine is absurd except if a correspondence can exist by “compression, fold ect..? »
The characteristic of this angle being to make disappear edges (by destroying the effect of prospect and to amplify the horizon or the building opposite).
 
 
November 2005:
The first exercise at the school of architecture consisted in refusing any preliminary image, the second was on the image: One month before returned I reversed my plan and the report/ratio of the project to the image took all its coherence of a blow.
Compared to the villa La Roche of Corbusier presented in my initial text and which is used to me as model, if I reverse the figure the space principal cubic and double which represented for me the expanding universe would be finally “the negative of universe” and the lengthened building bordered by a curved wall skirted by a slope would be an image of the universe. But that contradicted all that I wrote in my initial text what is not very serious. Then I finally propose to consider that it is the balcony compressed with the junction of spaces 2 which would represent our known universe.
The balcony is designed by Corbusier as if 2 perpendicular spaces were initially superimposed. Its form would result from the action to draw aside them with 90°. I have several times written that the assumption of before big-bang is a concept space than temporal and in addition that what one regards as before big-bang being located this one on both sides? On the new assumption it is a question of stating clearly that there is after big-bang distinct from our known universe. Thus our universe becomes a passage. Our known universe and the big-bang is only one and even thing   
Foot-note: A second reading of the last paragraph of the text of June 2003 makes me discover a paradox:
I always thought as of the beginning of my text, in my intuitive system of comparison bringing into play the chronology of full and with the vacuums which the absolute density did not exist and which my comparison rested on an image. But if one pushes the reasoning a little further it is carried out that if negative crust is not the absolute vacuum to express that there is no symmetry in the chronology of the vacuums between the ordinary material and cosmos and by thus proposing the edge of the universe like an intense zone of fluctuation for marking the rupture well. On the other hand the crust itself is not the infinite density and thus by reversing the proposal one can say that the crust is not negative absolute vacuum. 
What I want to say it is that while remaining surface my text keeps its coherence but if one pushes the reasoning to the extreme (I always have wanted to make it but thus that took 20 years to me) the supposed elements to represent symmetry are not even already them not symmetrical what would blame the conclusion on the force that no symmetry between the chronology of full represents and of the vacuums between the ordinary matter and the universe. That brings me to a strange conclusion. Is my system of comparison for me a ternary form of extension of the principle of exclusion of Pauli who is a binary principle?
1)if beyond the edge of the universe which I describe as intense zone of fluctuation there is only absolute vacuum which is a concept that I avoid in general then by reversing my usual proposal, I would say that the infinitely small one is not the absolute density. And that applies to the ordinary matter as for the universe. And it is which they probably never meet i.e. Note in the passing that concerning my model for the ordinary matter the densest part is at the edge.
2)My comprehension of the principle of exclusion of Pauli changes completely. Psychologically one imagines in the first time that the matter being hard cannot be based in any case on a certain scale contrary to the vacuum. Out it is the opposite, it is the vacuum which can be absolute and not the full one and therefore one cannot reduce it to nothing.
       
I would say and that I always thought it, that the full one and the vacuum is indivisible and it is the way in which they mix which imports from where the idea of the “threshold of inversion of scale”. By thus pushing the paradox until the end, as I associate the energy of the vacuum vibrations I believe to foresee the paradox wave particle now. 
May 21, 2006:
By reading again my text today, I thinks that it is necessary can be to imagine the edge of the convex universe compared to us within the framework of a figure of Noebus. That leads us to ask us not only the question of before big-bang but to also imagine the existence of after big bang. Our known universe would be like a kind of tended arc enters  2 poles.
The first article that I read on the no commutative geometry of Alain Connes (Science and Life April 2005) pointed out to me the principle of no recursivity of Penrose principle which I regard as determinant as I show it in my text. Not being a specialist I thought that that had can be nothing to see. But 2ème did article what I read on the theory of Alain Connes (Science and future October 2005) refers to bricks of Penrose?  

 

TEXTS OF REFERENCE
HEISENBERG  The part and the whole       :                       unified theory of the fields 1957-58
PAULI:
“In the former physics of the atomic envelope, one still could be based on visual images coming from the repertory of traditional physics”.
“In an ideal way, one could imagine that all real symmetries of nature were born from a succession of unfoldings”.
HEISENBERG: answer to Carl FRIEDRICH:
It is thus important for you, intervened I, that the unfolding about which Pauli spoke is not an unfolding within the meaning of Aristotélicienne logic, but that the complementarity intervenes there in a decisive point.
The unfolding with the direction of Aristote would be indeed, like wrote Pauli, an attribute of the devil; while being repeated continuously, it would involve only chaos. But the third possibility, that which appeared with complementarity in quantum theory, can be fertile; the repetition leads then towards the space of the real world. Indeed, in the former mystic, the number `3' is related to the divine principle. And, without going also far, one could think of the triptych of Hegel: Thesis-antithesis-synthesis. The synthesis should not be a simple mixture, a compromise carried out starting from the thesis and of the antithesis, it produces something qualitatively again. »
PHYSICS AND REALITY - Bernard d' Espagnat
Mr. MUGUR-SCHACHTER                p 237
“Once one perceived clearly the cognitive situation on which is dependent quantum mechanics, very paradoxically, by one fluctuation comparable with that which reveals certain drawings of one cubic sometimes like concave sometimes like convex, it achieves an inversion. What with the first access, striking in the quantum approach like so new, suddenly appears gifted contrary to a kind of universality".
SCHRODINGER “tangle within the function of wave "          p 61/62/63 - p 425
principle of not-separability “The unit is in a determined state, but it is not the case of each taken part separately ".
Mr. BITBOL                 p494/495
“The second against representation is provided by the quantum theory of the fields, which to date is best corroborated and one of the most advanced quantum theories. The representation which its formalism supports is remarkably close in its spirit to the cosmological model which Schrodinger defended, which does not have anything a coincidence besides since Schrodinger was one of the precursors of quantum theory of the fields and one of its hotter in favour towards the end of its career. This new representation substitutes for the concept of a multiplicity of N twilights, that of nth level of excitation of a single vibrating medium. As B underlines it. of Espagnat, it makes it possible to replace the rather suspect concepts of “creation” and annihilation' of particles (to which relativistic equivalence between matter and energy leads when one applies it within the framework of thought nuclear physicist), by that of change of state of the vibrating medium. One passes thus from the firstly statistical point of view from a primarily dynamic point of view.
B. ESPAGNAT                    p 659
2) Second difficulty
What my tourist guide of Saintonge teaches me incontestably has a relationship with the story of architecure, but I avoid saying (“abruptly”) that the guide “refers to the history of the architecutre ". And I am right well, bus statement that would be to mean that it is about a book whose object would be the history of architecture, which is false. Admittedly, when I say that what my guide teaches me “ has a relationship with architecture "I allot to architecture a grammatical function of object. Although architecture only is very summarily evoked by the guide (it gives any quantitative detail, no technical precision), this mine attribution is unquestionably legitimate bus the guide evokes certain architectural styles. I hold that the situation considered in the paragraph "second difficulty" is very similar. Admittedly independent reality does not constitute (in my opinion) the object of physics, not more than architecture does not constitute that of the guide, but physics evokes (in a vague way) certain general features of independent reality (such is, of less, my thesis). On this point, I thus do not see more “obscure conflicts" in my design that I see any in the very simple assertion only the contents of my guide have a certain relationship with the history of architecture.
Par Fabrice LEFEBVRE du PREY - Publié dans : space forces forms flows
Ecrire un commentaire - Voir les 0 commentaires
Vendredi 10 août 2007 5 10 /08 /Août /2007 19:47

musique classique - best of

6 mois d'écoute, 600 morceaux. (6 mons listening classic music)

CHOPIN                 Polonaise fantaisie op 61 N°7        piano             Horowitz            Carnegie Hall 1966
MOZART                Sonate mib M N°302b                       violon             Szigetti               piano         Zzel
HAYDN                  Concerto en ré M                                violoncelle    Gendron            dir Casal, Concerts Lamoureux
BEETHOVEN       Concerto N°5 L'Empereur                 piano             Serkin                Violon    Busch         NY 
DVORJAC             Concerto si m op 104                        violoncelle    Gassado            Perlea?
BRAHMS               Concerto ré M op 77                           violon            Neveu  
SHUBERT            Ave Mria 52w6-839                              violon            Kogan                 piano    Mitnish
TCHAKOVSKI      Concerto ré M                                       violon            Oistrakh             dir Ormandie
WASSENAERT    Concerto sol M                                                           Fury  
VIEUXTEMPS      Concerto N°1 la m 46                         violoncelle   Schiff                   dir Mariner                EMI
ELGAR                  Variation Enigma                                                                                    dir Bernstein 
ROLLA                  divertissement mib M                         violon           Mussuneli           Soler Era
HAYDN                 Sonate pour clavier                             piano            Gould                                                      SONY

    
Par Fabrice LEFEBVRE du PREY - Publié dans : musique classique - best of
Ecrire un commentaire - Voir les 0 commentaires
Jeudi 9 août 2007 4 09 /08 /Août /2007 18:28

portraits crayon pastel sanguine

undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined
Par Fabrice LEFEBVRE du PREY - Publié dans : portraits
Ecrire un commentaire - Voir les 0 commentaires
Jeudi 2 août 2007 4 02 /08 /Août /2007 08:25

croquis architecture

undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined


















































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































Par Fabrice LEFEBVRE du PREY - Publié dans : croquis architecture
Ecrire un commentaire - Voir les 1 commentaires
Vendredi 20 juillet 2007 5 20 /07 /Juil /2007 10:23

habitat basse consommation

 

Il m'est apparu tout de suite qu'il y avait une réelle complexité dans le rôle de l'inertie d'un matériau et celui de l'isolation d'un bâtiment. (Un matériau à forte inertie est un matériau qui met du temps à se refroidir ou à se réchauffer).

 

Un mur de 50 cm à forte inertie mais non isolant, s'il fait 3° le jour et 0° la nuit on gèle et

15 cm pour isoler une façade même au sud est totalement insuffisant.

 

Le puits canadien, le photovoltaïque, l’éolienne, la géothermie, le plancher chauffant etc… sont des systèmes remarquables mais coûtent cher et sont à mon avis à utiliser si on possède les fonds nécessaire malgré les aides de l’état.

 

Être drastique sur l'isolation de l'habitat. Il vaut mieux mettre plus d'argent dans un isolant.

 

Soit 36 cm de panneaux à base d’ouate (de cellulose), fabrication très écologique,

traité contre le feu et les bestioles, très efficace en été, meilleure  efficacité thermique que les laines

minérales à R équivalent, très bon en acoustique et durable. Son prix est le même que celui d'un

Monomur de 37 cm pour un R plus de 2 fois supérieures.

 

Nota : tous ces produits sont utilisés depuis peu et doivent être conformes aux normes et posés suivant les règles de l’art.

 

Mon mur doit impérativement avoir un R = 10 (habitat super passif)

 

Côté extérieur je conseille un mur de 20 cm  en brique creuse à très forte résistance mécanique bon marché et présenté comme ayant un bon comportement face à l'humidité.

 

Tous les vitrages sont en triple vitrage à l'isolation renforcée et avec gaz rare. Ces vitrages sont certainement le double du prix habituel mais moins cher que de mettre du photovoltaïque pour chauffer l'habitat.

 

Il reste à traiter le problème de la ventilation de l’habitat. La VMC double flux permet de réchauffer l’air rentrant peut être un bon investissement mais nécessite un entretien régulier (130€ tous les 3 ans).

 

Enfin je conseille d’utiliser une pompe à chaleur pour le chauffage et l’eau chaude (avec complément photovoltaïque si possible).

Par Fabrice LEFEBVRE du PREY - Publié dans : habitat basse consommation
Ecrire un commentaire - Voir les 0 commentaires
Jeudi 19 juillet 2007 4 19 /07 /Juil /2007 11:04

Habitat low energy consumption

Habitat low energy consumption:

It appeared to me immediately that there was a real complexity in the role of the inertia of a material and that of the insulation of a building. (A material with strong inertia is a material which spends time to cool or to be heated).

A wall of 50 cm to strong inertia but not insulator, if it makes 3° the day and 0° the night one freezes and 15 cm to insulate a frontage even in the south is completely insufficient.

 

The Canadian well, the photovoltaic one, the wind mill, geothermic, heating floor etc… are remarkable systems but are expensive and are in my opinion to be used if one has the money necessary in spite of the state aid.

 

Be drastic on the insulation of the habitat. It is to better put more money in an insulator.

That is to say 36 cm of panels containing wadding (of cellulose), very ecological manufacture,

treaty counters fire and the small beasts, very effective in summer, better  thermal effectiveness that wools mineral with R equivalent, very good in acoustics and durable. Its price is the same one as that of one Monomur of 37 cm for a R more than 2 times higher.

Foot-note: all these products are used recently and must in conformity with the standards and be put up according to the code of practice.

 

My wall must imperatively have a R = 10 (passive super habitat)

External side I advise a wall of 20 cm  out of brick hollow with very strong mechanical resistance cheap and presented like having a good behaviour about moisture.

 

All the glazing are in triple glazing with the reinforced insulation and with rare gas. These glazing are certainly the double of the usual price but less expensive than to put the photovoltaic one to heat the habitat.

 

It remains to deal with the problem of the ventilation of the habitat. VMC double flow makes it possible to heat the returning air can be a good investment but requires a regular maintenance.

 

Finally I advise to use a heat pump for the heating and hot water (with photovoltaic complement if possible).

 

Par Fabrice LEFEBVRE du PREY - Publié dans : Habitat low energy consumption
Ecrire un commentaire - Voir les 1 commentaires

Présentation

 

Catégories

 

Album photos

Voir tous les albums

 

Recherche

 

Calendrier

Mai 2012
L M M J V S D
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31      
<< < > >>

 

Créer un blog gratuit sur over-blog.com - Contact - C.G.U. - Rémunération en droits d'auteur - Signaler un abus