3 ms·

I think the cool thing about this from what I gather is that the instructions to the masons were basically a recursive procedure and they got to decide on the r

I think the cool thing about this from what I gather is that the instructions to the masons were basically a recursive procedure and they got to decide on the recursive depth.

canoebuilder 9y ago
That is cool, a compressed blueprint. Also cool is that it is still under construction, maybe someone reading right now is involved and can tell us more.
- saeranv 9y ago
  I'm not involved, but I've met the researcher at a couple of computational architecture conferences: Mark Burry - https://www.rmit.edu.au/media-objects/multimedia/video/projects/sagrada-familia-and-rmit-university https://www.rmit.edu.au/media-objects/multimedia/video/proje... The other interesting thing about the Sagrada Familia is that Gaudi based the primary structure on catenary structures. Off the top of my head, I believe he first made weighted string assemblies of the vaults, such that the string structure is held in perfect tension from the gravitational force of its own weight. Then by casting the resulting shape in concrete, and flipping the shape over, the resulting structure is optimized for compression. The tensile structure reflects the force of gravity on the string assembly - it is "optimized" for its own weight, so when flipping it over, and swapping the tension members for compression members, we know this new structure is perfectly shaped to distribute internal and self-weight for compression.
theoh 9y ago
Hmm, really it was more like a geometric progression. David Gelernter has commented on the lack of familiarity art/architectural historians have with terminology like "recursive" or "self-similar" (I prefer the latter because it leaves room for the judgements and conspicuous non-exact applications of recursion in architecture): https://www.edge.org/response-detail/10574 https://www.edge.org/response-detail/10574 Also this, and the article it was saved from, bringing music and the proportions of the human body into the equation: https://www.pinterest.com/pin/358317714073877302/ https://www.pinterest.com/pin/358317714073877302/ Finally this: "Every society has seen architecture as something that transcends its functional role, as a diagram of the cosmos," https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/architecture-design-blog/2013/may/15/charles-correa-india-greatest-architect-exhibition https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/architecture-design... Edit: I'm an architecture historian so I didn't mean it if I came across as pompous -- but that Gelernter link conveys a weird sense of CS being superior to the art historians, and at the same time makes more of recursive patterns in physical architecture than is justified. I have mixed feeling about this projection of the ideas of one field on to another: something like the Sierpinski gasket is not good architecture, and it takes a real expert in building to understand the difference, not a mathematician/computer scientist who can spot recursion. So my possibly contentious point was that a schematic reading of architecture as recursive (or even cosmic) is valid but also kind of the most superficial non-aesthetic form of thinking about architecture...

I think the cool thing about this from what I gather is that the instructions to the masons were basically a recursive procedure and they got to decide on the recursive depth.

canoebuilder 9y ago

That is cool, a compressed blueprint. Also cool is that it is still under construction, maybe someone reading right now is involved and can tell us more.

saeranv 9y ago
I'm not involved, but I've met the researcher at a couple of computational architecture conferences: Mark Burry - https://www.rmit.edu.au/media-objects/multimedia/video/projects/sagrada-familia-and-rmit-university https://www.rmit.edu.au/media-objects/multimedia/video/proje... The other interesting thing about the Sagrada Familia is that Gaudi based the primary structure on catenary structures. Off the top of my head, I believe he first made weighted string assemblies of the vaults, such that the string structure is held in perfect tension from the gravitational force of its own weight. Then by casting the resulting shape in concrete, and flipping the shape over, the resulting structure is optimized for compression. The tensile structure reflects the force of gravity on the string assembly - it is "optimized" for its own weight, so when flipping it over, and swapping the tension members for compression members, we know this new structure is perfectly shaped to distribute internal and self-weight for compression.

theoh 9y ago

Hmm, really it was more like a geometric progression. David Gelernter has commented on the lack of familiarity art/architectural historians have with terminology like "recursive" or "self-similar" (I prefer the latter because it leaves room for the judgements and conspicuous non-exact applications of recursion in architecture): https://www.edge.org/response-detail/10574 https://www.edge.org/response-detail/10574 Also this, and the article it was saved from, bringing music and the proportions of the human body into the equation: https://www.pinterest.com/pin/358317714073877302/ https://www.pinterest.com/pin/358317714073877302/ Finally this: "Every society has seen architecture as something that transcends its functional role, as a diagram of the cosmos," https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/architecture-design-blog/2013/may/15/charles-correa-india-greatest-architect-exhibition https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/architecture-design... Edit: I'm an architecture historian so I didn't mean it if I came across as pompous -- but that Gelernter link conveys a weird sense of CS being superior to the art historians, and at the same time makes more of recursive patterns in physical architecture than is justified. I have mixed feeling about this projection of the ideas of one field on to another: something like the Sierpinski gasket is not good architecture, and it takes a real expert in building to understand the difference, not a mathematician/computer scientist who can spot recursion. So my possibly contentious point was that a schematic reading of architecture as recursive (or even cosmic) is valid but also kind of the most superficial non-aesthetic form of thinking about architecture...