ART in SCIENCE

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

Well, since this has become a gallery, i found those portraits of dementia:

 

 

The series is here.

I liked his comments about the picture top right, with the 'saw' .

 

When he asked his doctor for a proper diagnosis, his doctor said he could only do that when he died.

 

---------- ----------

 

On a more pleasant note . The new science subject of symmetry , shows how even something as esoteric as beauty can have a scientific root .

 

. -

 

Notice the two differing emotional responses.

 

With the poor gentleman with altsheimers a lack of symmetry in the faces have a slightly alienating feeling , whereas the lady's very symmetrical face has a comforting feeling !

 

Or at least to me as a retired gentleman !

 

Mike

.....

art is an emotional expression that conveys higher thought process whereas science breaks things down to simplest components.

while i feel that science is one of our most valuable assets as a species, we live in a world that contains more than absolutes and numbers.

psycology is a small step into that realm ....

I am currently investigating the aspect of different feelings and emotions that can be engendered by different paintings . A fellow artist friend of mine , who paints beautiful watercolour paintings. When I asked him what he was trying to get across when he painted a country scene . He said , " I am trying , to stimulate the ' feeling '. I have when I look at that scene. Not what it looks like. What feeling I get , when I look at it.

Note following picture

 

To me , unlike the comfortable feeling of the previous symmetrical images.

 

I get this feeling of isolation, a little scary , yet a feeling of adventure and new horizons. Not really comfortable but beckoning . Maybe !

 

Mike

Edited April 1, 2014 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Acme]

This is the same as the previous but one ,one , is it not ?

 

Mike

No; not the same. I have put up 3 different images. They share a common ancestry, but otherwise are as different as one sibling from another.

 

Well, since this has become a gallery, i found those portraits of dementia:

 

 

The series is here.

G'donya mate! How else would we ascertain the scientific character of art if we couldn't look at it?

Edited April 1, 2014 by Acme

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

No; not the same. I have put up 3 different images. They share a common ancestry, but otherwise are as different as one sibling from another.G'donya mate! How else would we ascertain the scientific character of art if we couldn't look at it?

I need a clue , that is not so oblique as your previous clues. . .?

 

Like . Is it animal, vegetable or mineral ?

 

We need to move this subject on to pleasant pastures , or I am not going to sleep tonight with all these haunting faces !

 

Mike

Edited April 1, 2014 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Acme]

I need a clue , that is note so oblique as your previous clues. . .?

 

Like . Is it animal, vegetable or mineral ?

 

Mike

It -well they- is/are math. Now while they're still technically 'just' art until I say what math, how do you like looking at them? What feelings, if any, do they evoke in you? Comfort? Fear? Rage? Happiness? Tell me...

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

It -well they- is/are math. Now while they're still technically 'just' art until I say what math, how do you like looking at them? What feelings, if any, do they evoke in you? Comfort? Fear? Rage? Happiness? Tell me...

I want to look at some sheep not maths !

 

Well I must say your pictures give me a comfortable feeling ! Complete neat satisfyingly symmetrical at least side to side .

Mike

 

. . . I know MATRICIES .?

 

.

 

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ.

Edited April 1, 2014 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Acme]

I want to look at some sheep not maths !image.jpg

 

Well I must say your pictures give me a comfortable feeling ! Complete neat satisfyingly symmetrical at least side to side .

Mike

 

I know matrices ?

Not matrices. As I early hinted, their progenitor predates algebra, even though algebra later had its way with them.

 

Sleep away. On a side note, did you know that M.C. Escher categorized all the possible planar symmetries before any mathematician? Nighty night.

Edited April 1, 2014 by Acme

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

Not matrices. As I early hinted, their progenitor predates algebra, even though algebra later had its way with them.Sleep away. On a side note, did you know that M.C. Escher categorized all the possible planar symmetries before any mathematician? Nighty night.

Platonic shapes existing in a special realm ?

 

Only the flickering shadows of reality seen on the walls of my cave

 

 

Mike

Edited April 1, 2014 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[studiot]

 

Sleep away. On a side note, did you know that M.C. Escher categorized all the possible planar symmetries before any mathematician? Nighty night.

 

 

In M De Sautoys book he tells of finding the full set embodied in the tiling in the Alhambra.

 

A good thousand years before Escher - though that is not to detract from Escher's achievements.

 

And, by the way, I gave my answer to your earlier question.

Edited April 1, 2014 by studiot

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

In M De Sautoys book he tells of finding the full set embodied in the tiling in the Alhambra.

 

A good thousand years before Escher - though that is not to detract from Escher's achievements.

 

And, by the way, I gave my answer to your earlier question.

Edited April 1, 2014 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Acme]

Platonic shapes existing in a special realm ?

 

Mike

Correct culture, but wrong character. Pre-Platonic, but no doubt a special realm.

In M De Sautoys book he tells of finding the full set embodied in the tiling in the Alhambra.

 

A good thousand years before Escher - though that is not to detract from Escher's achievements.

 

And, by the way, I gave my answer to your earlier question.

I'll look into it. From a library of hundreds of volumes I'm now down to a score of books due to a house fire a couple decades ago. Consequently I can't precisely check my anecdotal assertion but I believe my source was this book on Escher. >> M.C. Escher: Visions of Symmetry by Doris Schattschneider

http://www.amazon.com/M-C-Escher-Visions-Symmetry-Edition/dp/0810943085

 

Doris Schattschneider's classic M. C. Escher: Visions of Symmetry (1990) is the most penetrating study of Escher's work in existence, and the one most admired by mathematicians and scientists. It deals with one powerful obsession that preoccupied Escher: what he called "the regular division of the plane," the puzzle-like interlocking of birds, fish, lizards, and other natural forms in continuous patterns. Schattschneider asks, "How did he do it?" She answers the question by meticulously analyzing Escher's notebooks, and the New Scientist described the result as "a collection of detective stories whose plots are brilliantly organized patterns."

Like the first edition of the book, this new volume includes many of Escher's masterworks, as well as hundreds of lesser-known examples of his work. It also features an illustrated epilogue by the author that reveals new information about Escher's inspiration and shows how his ideas of symmetry have influenced mathematicians, computer scientists, and contemporary artists. Visions of Symmetry is a trip into the mind of a creator who continues to captivate the world.

If not that book specifically then one of several similar works listed here. >> http://www.mcescher.com/about/books-on-escher/

 

Edit: Read up a bit on M De Sautoy and I misunderstood in that I thought he wrote a thousand years before Escher. Now corrected I can only say Escher studied Islamic art as well and while it may be true all the symmetries were extant, as I understand it Escher was the first to rigorously characterize them. Six of one and half a dozen of another I suppose.

 

 

My pardon Studiot, but what question did you answer again? Sorry if I missed something. D'oh!

 

Parting on an Escheresque note, here's a tiling I did under that inspirational chord.

 

Edited April 2, 2014 by Acme

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

Correct culture, but wrong character. Pre-Platonic, but no doubt a special realm.I'll look into it. From a library of hundreds of volumes I'm now down to a score of books due to a house fire a couple decades ago. Consequently I can't precisely check my anecdotal assertion but........ D'oh!Parting on an Escheresque note, here's a tiling I did under that inspirational chord.

.

 

". ENTER HERE . ONLY HE WHO IS A GEOMETER. "

 

. ....THE GREAT LIBRARY OF ALEXANDRIA .....

 

The great library at Alexandria, - part of the Greek Empire - burned down and nearly all books lost to humanity. The library and it's stones lays beneath the sea off the Nile delta Egypt. All that learning lost until the great Renaissance in Europe . After the Dark Ages [ I hope I have got my History right, never good at it at school . More interested in Science . ]

 

GOT it

 

( William Blake )

 

mike

Edited April 2, 2014 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[studiot]

To quote M Escher

 

 

M Escher

 

I often wondered at my own mania of making periodic drawings. Once I asked a friend of mine, a psychologist, about the reason for my being so fascinated by them, but his answer: that I must be driven by a primitive prototypical instinct, does not explain anything. What can the reason be for my being alone in this field? Why does none of my fellow artists seem to be as fascinated as I am by these interesting shapes? Yet there rules are purely objective ones, which every artist could apply in his own personal way!

 

Note : both artist and purely objective rules are mentioned.

 

So was Escher artist or scientist or a mixture of both or neither?

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

.

O.K. Responding to reviewing Swansonts various comments:-

I am trying to get my head around where you are Swansont and what you are saying Swansont . I think I am getting a clearer picture .

 

B. I usually get a picture forming when thinking about issues, which I did in this case which I will come to further on. But almost immediately some words echoed :

[T]here are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns there are things we do not know we don't know. Donald Rumsfeld sagte am 12. Februar 2002

 

The Image is :-

A. :-

....................... ........................... ............................... .... ................ ......................... ...................... .....

.

...................... ........................ ................................ .................................. .......................... . ..................

The above picture !

I undertook in a lesson in Woodland landscapes produced in pastels TODAY 2pm to 4 pm . 2nd April 2014

I asked the art teacher if I could do it with a

 

----" known, ----known- unknowns,-- ----unknown- unknowns - --- THEME.

I explained it was a Rumsfeld theme to do with the science forum. He ( my Art instructor ) is an artist of great experience, also his career was in aircraft aerodynamic design ( age 93 years old ) . Engineer - Artist

 

Hence is symbolic terms

:-

The near immediate trees represent known science( provable , evident, touchable, easily identified, precision drawn, predictable , most aspect of the tree is explained by main stream science/biology/physics. I would dare to say this is where you are mainly comfortable with / and at Swansont.

 

The mid range trees are in the next layer back , hinted at by size and colour , but that is about all. This is the known unknown. Namely one is quite happy that they are there, but the detail is not known, yet one is fairly sure if you went into the forest and investigated you would be confident that one could make investigation, even if new species were discovered with strange characteristics one has a degree of confidence one could cope with what was there. I would dare to say that you, Swansont are ok with this as long as you have proof ,which at the moment is Not currently available . But of course is not certain as nobody has been there yet. Representing ongoing speculation and research.

 

The blackness to the top and left side, and over the horizon , and beyond the sky lays the unknown -unknowns. There may or may not be anything there. What is there could be anything. This I believe possibly presumptuously you are not happy with, comfortable , with. Representing the areas such as far reaching 'blue Sky ' speculation , and some form of investigative debate and far stretching ideas.

 

ART in SCIENCE I would say enters all three regions , because it can easily. Some dare to play in these regions, even scientists. Because the deep forest excites them, the mysteries beckon . As regards the darkness and beyond excite them beyond belief .

 

Icarus of course tried and failed. NASA has tried and won some and loose some . Some scientists are reaching for the skies. Who knows at this stage whether they will win or fail. Only time will tell.

 

ART HAS A PLACE TO PLAY IN ALL THESE AREAS OF INVESTIGATION ! ILLUSTRATING AS REQUIRED.

 

Mike

Edited April 2, 2014 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Acme]

The above picture !

I undertook in a lesson in Woodland landscapes produced in pastels TODAY 2pm to 4 pm . 2nd April 2014

I asked the art teacher if I could do it with a

 

----" known, ----known- unknowns,-- ----unknown- unknowns - --- THEME.

I explained it was a Rumsfeld theme to do with the science forum. ...

Mike

With all due respect, Rumsfeld is a jackass and what you are quoting from him is pure unadulterated jackassery. Please rethink taking your cues from a war monger.

 

To quote M Escher

I often wondered at my own mania of making periodic drawings. Once I asked a friend of mine, a psychologist, about the reason for my being so fascinated by them, but his answer: that I must be driven by a primitive prototypical instinct, does not explain anything. What can the reason be for my being alone in this field? Why does none of my fellow artists seem to be as fascinated as I am by these interesting shapes? Yet there rules are purely objective ones, which every artist could apply in his own personal way!

Note : both artist and purely objective rules are mentioned.

 

So was Escher artist or scientist or a mixture of both or neither?

 

I vote definitely an admixture.

Edited April 2, 2014 by Acme

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

With all due respect, Rumsfeld is a jackass and what you are quoting from him is pure unadulterated jackassery. Please rethink taking your cues from a war monger.

 

 

 

O.K. Clearly a public apology is required from me. I had no idea He would cause such a reaction. Had I known that I would never have quoted him. I was attempting quite the opposite , Lighthearted humor. In England , his particular comments about "KNOWNS" and "UNKNOWNS " I quoted have been a source of much Pleasurable Humor , with no disrespect either to the man or the country that he represented at the time. He could have been anybody.

 

It just sounded Funny !

 

Yet another Unreserved apology . Sorry ! By Mike . I think perhaps I should retire to oblivion and knit socks .

 

Edited April 2, 2014 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Acme]

O.K. Clearly a public apology is required from me. I had no idea He would cause such a reaction. Had I known that I would never have quoted him. I was attempting quite the opposite , Lighthearted humor. In England , his particular comments about "KNOWNS" and "UNKNOWNS " I quoted have been a source of much Pleasurable Humor , with no disrespect either to the man or the country that he represented at the time. He could have been anybody.

 

It just sounded Funny !

 

Yet another Unreserved apology . Sorry ! By Mike . I think perhaps I should retire to oblivion and knit socks .

 

image.jpg

Can you do argyle?

Apology accepted. Don't let it happen again.

No doubt it's funny in England because it's another example of the jackass crap Americans can come up with. Nevertheless, it's a good habit to look up who and what you intend to quote before hitting the Post button. Some of us American jackasses call this 'due diligence'.

 

Technical writing is an art. ~ Acme

 

Reading maketh a full person; conference a ready person; and writing an exact person.

~ Francis Bacon ~

~ philosopher, statesman, scientist, jurist, orator, essayist, and author ~

[paraphrased]

...

The great library at Alexandria, - part of the Greek Empire - burned down and nearly all books lost to humanity. The library and it's stones lays beneath the sea off the Nile delta Egypt. All that learning lost until the great Renaissance in Europe . After the Dark Ages [ I hope I have got my History right, never good at it at school . More interested in Science . ]

...

mike

You are quite right to talk of history in science as well as the art in it.

 

Anyway, I will post 1 more of my art pieces before I reveal that all of them are gnomons of polygonal numbers and that the definition of polygonal numbers is variously attributed, often to Hypsicles of Alexandria around 170 BC, sometimes to Pythagoras around 460 BC. Arguably in any case, as old as dirt.

...The Greek word for these incremental growth layers of polygonal number shapes was "gnomon", from the same root as "gnome" = "intelligence" and "gnosis" = "knowledge" which we still use to designate its lack in "ignorance"31.

 

The literal meaning of "gnomon" was "knower". By extension, the upright pointer of a sundial was a gnomon, a "knower of time", and the carpenters square that has the shape of the gnomon for square numbers and allows its user to know right angles was also called gnomon.

... http://www.recoveredscience.com/Primes1ebook05.htm

other sources: http://math.bu.edu/people/kost/teaching/MA341/PolyNums.pdf

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polygonal_Numbers

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pythagoras

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypsicles

 

Perhaps some of you will recognize the Perfect Squares from 1² to 6².

[davidivad]

schizophrenia

 

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

This is an actual example of a three panel painting I have put together for the purpose of taking part in scientific , informative Instruction. This a Geology Group in Exeter , which meets in Exeter college , but is part of the U3A ( university of the third age ) .
It is illustrating the setting of the Earth History from just before the Big Bang , through the formation of galaxies and stars. ,illustrating super novas. The middle panel covers the 3,500,000,000 year formation of the core and mantle , and pre-Cambrian period,taking it to 4,000,000,000 years of developement [ to 550,000,000 years ago ,approx 500millionyears ago .

Then up through the various periods of rock and life development.:-

Cambrian,ordovesian,Silurian,Devonian,Carboniferous,Permian,Triassic,Jurassic ,Cretaceous ,tertiary,quartinery.)To today.

The third panel show three major blocks of
a) the environment for life, including seas and sea creatures ,
b) plant and animal life and
C). human consciousness .

So although this is a contemporary painting , barely 18 months old , it was purposely produced for science communication purposes. It would have been hard to find an illustration spanning the whole thing.



Mike

Edited April 4, 2014 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[davidivad]

sorry about the crosspost mike.

once i realized my mistake it was already out there.

please consider my previous post as a multitasking error.

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

, I will post 1 more of my art pieces before I reveal that all of them are gnomons of polygonal numbers and that the definition of polygonal numbers is variously attributed, often to Hypsicles of Alexandria around 170 BC, sometimes to Pythagoras around 460 BC. Arguably in any case, as old as dirt.other sources: http://math.bu.edu/people/kost/teaching/MA341/PolyNums.pdfhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polygonal_Numbershttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pythagorashttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HypsiclesPerhaps some of you will recognize the Perfect Squares from 1² to 6².

Not this drawing but

 

Your first drawing - ITS GOT TO BE A 9 based polygonal structure. " Nonagonal "

 

 

 

Mike

Edited April 5, 2014 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Acme]

Not this drawing but Your first drawing - ITS GOT TO BE A 9 based polygonal structure. " Nonagonal "

Correct. Properly it is called the gnomon of nonogonal numbers. Mathematicians prefer to write/say 9-gonal numbers. My drawing illustrates the first 9 such numbers: {1,9,24,46,75,111,154,204,261...} The algebraic equation is P=(7n^2-5n)/2.

 

Square numbers[edit]

Polygons with higher numbers of sides, such as pentagons and hexagons, can also be constructed according to this rule, although the dots will no longer form a perfectly regular lattice like above.

Pentagonal numbers[edit]

Hexagonal numbers[edit]

Yes; the series of gnomons of polygonal numbers progresses without bound starting with 3-gonal, i.e. triangular numbers. Drawn as regular polygons they all do make perfectly regular lattices, albeit not square ones as above. However, as the series of gnomons progresses the perimeters become indistinguishable from circles which is why the algebra is so useful. The first 3 triangular numbers form the sacred tetractys of the Pythagoreans. >> Tetractys @ Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetractys

 

Nevertheless, the art IS the science in my examples, and remained the primary way to represent the science of polygonal numbers for a millennium give or take a few centuries. I say primary because they can be described prosaically, i.e. by talking about skip counting. For example the triangular numbers: add the first Natural number =1, add the first 2 Natural numbers =1+2=3, add the first 3 Natural numbers = 1+2+3=6, add the first 4 to get 1+2+3+4=10. This gives the first 4 triangular numbers {1,3,6,10...}, represented by the tetractys.

 

For square numbers you add every other number: 1, 1+3=4, 1+3+5=9, giving {1,4,9...} For pentagonal numbers add every 3rd number: 1, 1+4=5, 1+4+7=12, giving {1,5,12...}

 

Quite the beautiful set of constructs.

[studiot]

Is this art or science

 

Here are 6 possible arrangements of a motorway overline bridge crossing twin carriageways.

 

Which do you prefer to approach?

Which do you find most aestetically pleasing?

 

My apologies for the squashed nature of the sketches.

 

 

It is interesting to note that

 

Arrangements 1 to 6 are arranged in increasing order of cost.

 

They are also arranged in decreasing order of accident rate.

Edited April 5, 2014 by studiot

[Acme]

Is this art or science

 

Here are 6 possible arrangements of a motorway overline bridge crossing twin carriageways.

 

Which do you prefer to approach?

Which do you find most aestetically pleasing?

 

My apologies for the squashed nature of the sketches.

 

mway1.jpg

 

It is interesting to note that

 

Arrangements 1 to 6 are arranged in increasing order of cost.

 

They are also arranged in decreasing order of accident rate.

Presuming the vertical lines are support columns, I prefer to approach #4 as well as finding it most aesthetically pleasing.

[arc]

Arrangements 1 to 6 are arranged in increasing order of cost.

 

They are also arranged in decreasing order of accident rate.

 

 

Presuming the vertical lines are support columns, I prefer to approach #4 as well as finding it most aesthetically pleasing.

 

I do also and would think most would. I wonder, and am willing to propose the fear of confinement "claustrophobia" drives up the anxiety and accidents in the first three. #4 is not the same claustrophobic confinement but rather a distrust of large seemingly under supported structures, or more accurately to the one having the anxiety, an unpredictable structure in their eyes.

 

It is similar to to the anxiety of crossing over bridges. Not all people are afraid of the height but rather the structure itself. I've seen people really freak out in small boats when passing under a very high and expansive interstate structure. I think #4 illicites anxiety of that expansive overhead of material while #6 finds the balance that most people can tolerate.

[Acme]

I do also and would think most would. I wonder, and am willing to propose the fear of confinement "claustrophobia" drives up the anxiety and accidents in the first three. #4 is not the same claustrophobic confinement but rather a distrust of large seemingly under supported structures, or more accurately to the one having the anxiety, an unpredictable structure in their eyes.

 

It is similar to to the anxiety of crossing over bridges. Not all people are afraid of the height but rather the structure itself. I've seen people really freak out in small boats when passing under a very high and expansive interstate structure. I think #4 illicites anxiety of that expansive overhead of material while #6 finds the balance that most people can tolerate.

My fear of #1 & #2 -column in #2 aside- is not born out of claustrophobia, rather out of not having a clear view of what lies beyond. Neither do I fear passing under a broad [apparently] unsupported span and it falling on me. What I do fear is collision with the columns in #2, #3, #5, and #6.

 

Slightly off-topic here, but I'll allow it on the basis of rhetoric being an art in science itself and your mention of boats & bridges.

 

Anecdotal aside: >> A friend & I were out on the Columbia river in a 12ft motorboat when a thunderstorm blew up. Too far from port to run, we took refuge under the Glen Jackson bridge. While we did have fear under there, it was not of the high massive structure falling, but rather of the multiple grand streams of water pouring down through the drains. They made a fire hose look like a squirt gun and had we come under one our little boat would have been swamped & sunk in seconds.

 

source: >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glenn_Jackson_Bridge