Art, Science + Technology
DMA9 Fall 2007, Section BArchive for November 5, 2007
Midterm Presentations
I was very intrigued by Caroline’s presentation on swarm behavior especially in diseases, so I wanted to learn more. Swarm intelligence has been studied for thousands of years, however only recently has knowledge of this behavior been applied to business, human relations, robotics, and medicine. Many businesses including transportation, distribution, and shipping companies are using concepts derived from swarm behavior to improve efficiency and profitability.
When bee colonies need a new hive, they send out some workers to seek out a new location, the best location is where the colonies will live permanently so they must choose carefully. Likewise, managers improve their effectiveness by applying the decentralized structure of swarms, such as ant and bee colonies, to their boardroom meetings so tough decisions can be carefully and impartially made. Each member at the meeting has equal rights and power, ideas are proposed and discussed impartially, therefore the best final decision can be reached.
In a swarm or flock, each individual entity has limited intelligence and follows a simple set of rules, this has led computer scientists to model swarm behavior with programs (such as Boids) that simulate such actions as a flock of birds in flight and schools of fish. Other engineers have taken this concept further by programming a network of robots to collaborate on a task, for example, patrolling a building for “intruders” and swarming around it.
Doctors are using these concepts and technologies to understand the progression of diseases and cancer. They use swarm theory to show how bacteria and viruses spread and attack parts of the body. Now the pharmaceutical industry is researching medicines that swarm to kill the parasites, infections, and bacteria.
http://www7.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0707/feature5/index.html
http://www.red3d.com/cwr/boids/
Week 5 Midterm and Reflection
Week 5 Midterm Reflection
There were a lot of interesting midterm power points. There were also a couple themes that certain power points had in common. A major one is turning something particular into music or art. I remember seeing a power point that proposed turning ones movements into corresponding sounds. There was also another presentation that proposed using an algorithm in to turn words into art. Robotics also seemed like another popular subject as there were many people who incorporated into their project proposals. One proposed to make a life like robotic rat and place it together with real rats and see if the robotic and real rats will mingle. Then there are some interesting grandiose projects, such as underwater biosphere structures. There were really a variety of projects proposals.
This midterm really was fun to do and watch. Although very few people were able to make the 1 minute mark and a lot went way over. But it was interesting to try to make the 1 minute limit knowing that it may be impossible to or very difficult. A lot of thought went into what should go into the slides and what the project proposals should be. Mostly likely for the final the students will probably have to carry out their project proposals to some extent or refine it.
5 Weeks of Reflection
In these five weeks, a lot of different subjects were really surfed over. There were scientific ones with relating arts. Some broad topics were robotics, bio-mimicry, AI, kinetic art, math, etc. I was able to encounter bits that I didn’t know previously and found interesting, such as phi, fractal, Taylorism, etc. Some of the lecture reinforced what I have already learned or touched on in high school, so it was helpful to review some past knowledge. It will be interesting to see what the next 5 weeks will bring and how creative the final will be.
Five Weeks in Reflection
After five weeks of going over how art, science, and technology are related and how new ideas are being formed every day; I realized that my classmates and I had learned a lot. The midterm displayed to everyone just how much we learned. Some students had creative ideas, such as making music out of one’s DNA. Others wanted to create robotic arms that could help further handicapped peoples capabilities. And on a less noble, but still entertaining and great idea, another group wanted to create a movie called the Terminatrix showing the dangers of robots to our society. After watching all of the presentations one could see the passion and energy that all of the students put into there projects. This midterm was my favorite and I got a lot more out of it than just taking a test. If we had taken a test, no one would have gotten to the creativity of all the other students or see the ideas that they presented. I would never have thought to do half of the things that they researched and created.
The only downfall that I saw in this project was the lack of time to present one’s ideas. I think that if a project similar to this is done in the future that two days are set aside for the presentations. This would allow students to project their ideas more fluidly and not be in such a hurry. Besides the time constraints this project was my favorite of college so far.
OR 
Midterm!
So I actually had a lot of fun doing this project. It was more creative and innovative that allowed me to use my creative side, (being a DESMA student we generally all loath lecture classes) but this one wasn’t bad.
There were a lot of good ideas, first the “Transformer” robot was pretty funny in its design and even though it was a scientific impracticality it still was intresting to see what people where thinking.
There were a lot of them that replicated similar designs just adding a elmement or tweaking the original design, including my own, and some of them were actually quite done. You know how they say if you have one persons imput the outcome can only be so much, but if you add more people a new idea or design might be better than the original.
I already put my 2 cents in on how we should have done the powerpoint, but making sure there was sufficient info to grade us on by adding footnotes, and that was fine. But when I think back as to what we could have done differently to maybe improve on the project, is to perhaps have a paper to go with our presentation. Have a 700-1000 word essay to accompany our slides, and that way we could have been more liberal about how we were going to present it.
Now, I understand we are trying to present this all in 1 min, like a comercial on TV, but I felt rushed. I wanted to explain my work to people and have them appreciate it, and I think a minute didn’t really accomplish that. If next time maybe we can work in groups, (I know we had the option to work in pairs but maybe next time 3-4), and have parts of it ready to turn in during TA sessions, we could have had more quality presentations.
Also people ran over time so much, making it under a min was maybe 30-45% of the class who presented. Maybe the idea above it too much for a midterm, and it doesn’t seem long enough for the final, but it would definetly be something I would love to do as a project, maybe even create that work that we are presenting for the final.
anyway really fun stuff, I enjoyed it and hope that anyone else who takes this class gets to expierience the same thing (or better 
)
-Leo
leonardo Maros
603-406-848
The Midterm
The Benefits
I think the midterms were a great innovation and a thorough success. The projects really brought out the originality that each person/group possesses, which is something a blue book cannot guarantee. The wide varieties of projects were all over the spectrum, proving that, if given the opportunity and freedom, anyone can be an innovator. I also think that this type of project was especially fitting for our class. We spend each class discussing and analyzing how art, science, and technology have all be incorporated into one another, and this project gave each and every one of us an opportunity to experience that on a personal level. The midterm as a whole was an example of thinking outside the box, which I believe was the overall motive behind the project.
The Alternative
What if the conventional idea of the blue book was scrapped? The blue book, or any other sort of formalized testing, limits the amount of originality one can put into their work. Yes, formalized testing does have its benefits, as it provides a level playing field for all. But since when has society ever been a level playing field? The truth is that it’s not, and a testing method such as the project we had is much more realistic in that it forces us each to utilize the talents that we have to the best of our capabilities. Furthermore, it’s possible that testing methods such as the blue book contribute to the separation of the two cultures by limiting our freedom to explore and innovate. I believe more innovative kinds of testing could help diminish the distance and promote further collaboration of the two.
http://www.engines4ed.org/hyperbook/nodes/NODE-69-pg.html
http://www.nd.edu/~frswrite/issues/2001-2002/Perez.shtml
http://www.alfiekohn.org/teaching/edweek/staiv.htm
http://www.educationevolving.org/pdf/Life_not_a_standardized_test.pdf
Week 5 post
Midterm Reflection
I enjoyed listening to the original ideas that were presented in class on Wednesday. I was particularly interested in the presentations that dealt with the idea of digitally creating music. The math or science that the students thought of to create the music was all very innovative. The project that dealt with the reversal of John Cage’s work was very interesting to me. In that short presentation I learned more about John Cage, and it influenced me to look more into his work. I also thought that the idea to reverse his musical theory was an original concept. I believe that if he did use Cage’s existing template for creating music based off of the I Ching and reversed his random coin flip it would not technically be considered a randomized result. It is, like the student pointed out, the opposite of Cage’s non-intention. The interpretation of Cage’s musical composition and the rearranging of it in an opposite form would be an interesting project to take up.
Another future idea that could be related to this project would be the utilization of a computerized program that could create random compositions. This program could also be automated to be affected by various surroundings. That way the music would reflect whatever environment it was created in.
The other presentations that caught my attention also had to do with music, but were the projects that had to do with using music to create pieces of artwork. If these projects were carried out, I would be interested to know what kind of patterns formed based on the music played and if types of music that are typically grouped together would have similar outcomes depending on the painting they produced.
John Cage Biography
Database of John Cage’s Work
American Masters Review of John Cage
Information of the I Ching
Bionics, Biomimicry, Prosthesis
For people who lost their limbs, prosthetic limbs can become an important thing in his/her life. And by their definition, prosthetic limbs are biomimicry product. Biomimicry is the science that studies nature, her models, systems, processes and elements and then imitates or takes creative inspiration from them to solve human problems. Artificial limbs are constructed by studying the original limbs, and is made to imitate the original limb by the user’s controls. So far as I know, the prosthetic limbs haven’t reached the state where they’re directly connected to the nerve system and controlled by the user’s thought.
The concept of connecting the prosthetic limb to the existing human nerve has been around for quite some time. The concept was shown in Japaneses animations such as Full Metal Alchemist
or Ghost in the Shell
In Full Metal Alchemist, a prosthetic limbs called ‘automail’ exist that connects to the nerves and move to the user’s thoughts just like normal limbs. These limbs can look like the natural limbs, but also they could be made to store weaponry if the user choses to. Connecting the nerves to the automail was described as extremely painful process in the animation. In Ghost in the Shell, instead of prosthetic limbs, the whole body can be replaced with a prosthetic body. The concept is to remove the part in the brain that holds the consciousness (called ghost) and put it in a prosthetic body. (sometimes referred to as the shell)
Both animations took prosthetic limbs to the level that is currently beyond our technology, but I thought it is interesting field and products close to what was described in these animation might be possible in the future. For starters, professor Kevin Warwick of University of Reading, UK have already tested and implemented electrode array and succeeded in moving robot arm.
Link:
Wikipedia ‘Biomimicry’ – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biomimicry
Wikipedia ‘Kevin Warwick’ – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Warwick
Week 5: Midterm
by Blair Georgakas
I thought the midterms were extremely successful. We could have simply taken the class period and written a short essay about our idea and how we would go about creating it for the midterm. However, the presentations gave us a huge advantage. They gave us the opportunity to hear about everyone’s ideas, enriching our own insight and broadening our perspectives of just what art and science can consist of. Not only were we able to focus in and thoroughly develop a proposal in one specific area of interest, we were also able to gain an appreciation of the possibilities that exist for the future. I really enjoyed listening to the projects because it showed me just how creative each individual in our class is and I learned something new about each person and his or her interests.
One project that interested me was the project about robotic limbs. She suggested new ideas to make amputees live more comfortably by creating legs that connect to the nerves. A sensor would be placed in the brain to detect the person’s desires of how they want to move their limbs. Then, the robotic leg would pick up its signal and move like any normal leg would. This incorporated many of the same ideas as my project did and I was fascinated at how the same idea could be used with completely different functions. My project focused on brain-computer interface and how we can place electrode arrays into human or animal brains in order to control robots just by thinking. I used the idea of brain-computer interface to control robots in a fun and light-hearted fashion. I had robots fighting in a boxing match. She, however, used the idea of BCI in a more practical way.
Another project that I found intriguing was the project about beauty and whether beauty is based science or whether it is in the eyes of the beholder. At first thought, one would not think of beauty as scientific. However, she presented an interesting idea that beauty can be traced back to specific face structure for men and women through history. She actually morphed famous faces into the ideal structures in order to compare what we think is beautiful to what scientifically is beautiful. The idea is perplexing, yet deeply fascinating.
Week 5
Creating innovative art/science concepts was definitely more interesting than sitting through a test. I was surprised to see that every single presentation had something interesting to offer. Everyone came up with such original ideas. I also thought that sitting through 100 plus presentations was going to be extremely boring, but it actually wasn’t. All the presentations were interesting and some of them were even funny. One project I thought was interesting was boxing using robots, but the robots would be directed by a person’s thoughts, so the humans wouldn’t get injured. The only downside to the midterm was the time limit. It was difficult to fully explain our proposals in 1 minute, even though most people did it in 2 minutes. With 100 students and 3 hours, it’s pretty much impossible to give presentations that are longer than 2 minutes. Overall, that was the most interesting midterm I have ever taken.
A friend of mine is taking Desma 10, and I looked through one of the books she was using to write an essay called New Bar and Club Design by Bethan Ryder. The book shows pictures of bars and clubs all over the world with ground-breaking designs. So much science is involved in creating designs for all different spaces. One particularly futuristic bar is Nectar in Las Vegas, designed by Jordan Mozer. Since the bar is in Las Vegas with its desert heat, the designer wanted to create a feeling of melted ice. The entire bar is painted with ice blues and whites, with little lighting, just a glow. The bar stools are made of the same material as bullet-proof vests. In design, art, science, and technology are constantly overlapping.
http://www.worldsbestbars.com/public/venue_listing.jsp?categoryId=25¤tVenueId=1578
http://vegas.napkinnights.com/vd/nectar_at_bellagio
http://www.linternaute.com/imprimer/sortir/sorties/resto/livres/06/plus-beaux-bars-monde/images/02nectar.jpg
creativity+smart students=amazing presentations
The general creativity of the projects was very inspiring. A lot of the projects involved a lot of mathematics, definitely a South Campus influence. Those that did not incorporate science I thought were the most interesting. The nail polish paintings were very original and poignant. Each one had a surreal essence. The flowing brushes from the nail applicator, the brilliant color, beautify a canvas as well as women. But that is not to say I did not like any projects involving science.
Each project had some uniqueness and of course some wit. One project that I thought was really clever was “all go rhythm.” He poked fun of all of the projects that used math. Various projects used science and music as themes. One used created notes from DNA, while other explored the differences between analog and digital music. The analog verse digital music was intriguing. We do not realize how much the medium of music has changed over that like two decades. Before that, digital did not exist, and now analog is only a small niche in the music community. The digitizing of music has been such a recent take over. Now we download songs online, or buy compact discs. Only a very few music enthusiasts buy vinyl. The cassette tape is completely obsolete, and it was the industry standard only a little more than a decade ago. Technology changes the way we view and create art.
Just the sheer volume of presentations made it hard to really absorb each one fully. Also the fact of only having one minute to present a complicated idea compounded the difficulty. But I was impressed by the quality of the presentation. I felt that most of them really could turn into amazing projects.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analog_sound_vs._digital_sound
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_audio_cassette
http://inventors.about.com/od/audiowaxrecordstomp3/a/Cassette_Tape.htm
Week 5: Midterm Presentations & Bionics
Midterm Presentations
I must admit, at first, I was a bit skeptical about the idea of using presentations as a midterm examination; although, after the extensive, but appealing, three and half hours of presentations, I was definitely impressed by the idea. I was impressed in particular at the fact that every individual had very original ideas and diagrams. Breaking away from the typical midterm examination and essay was a great initiative. While the majority of presentations involved far-fetched project proposals and ideas, there was a handful that could in fact become a reality in our present day world. It was evident that project ideas for future research and scientific innovation were very well thought of. This was a great technique for us to take the information from the previous four weeks of class and incorporate them into an innovative concept and project proposal.
Tierra System
Thomas Ray’s Tierra system certainly sounded interesting; self replicating computer programs? The project “attempts to use evolution by natural selection in the medium of the digital computer to generate complex and intelligent software”. The scientists working on this system believe that evolution, by natural selection, in the medium of carbon chemistry, has produced intelligent and complex life forms. Therefore, this idea, derived from living organisms, is now being tested with machines and computer software. Experiments have already shown that evolution in terms of natural selection works in terms of computer machine code. The fact that human evolution and intelligence is now being incorporated and associated with artificial intelligence fascinates me. Although appealing, it is quite a disturbing fact. This concept makes me think about horror movies based upon future destruction of the human race, in the hands of artificial intelligence and robots. Although it appears as an improbable idea, research like this brings this thought closer to reality.
http://www.nis.atr.jp/~ray/pubs/images/index.html
http://www.nis.atr.jp/~ray/index.html
Week 5 – Presentation by Nathan Hsu
What is Iron Magnetic Sculpture?
In the world of Art, surprisingly few have used the magnetic forces as a source of the product. Hence, endeavoring to innovate and explore the least taken path in the realm of Art, we chose to utilize our science knowledge and creative minds to propose another source of material for modern artists. By applying electricity on the magnet structure on the sculptures, the artists are free to manipulate the iron powder cover through the intensity of the circuit, which will result in producing different shapes on different levels of intensity. This technique can also sculpture statues with mobility because, although the movement of magnetic backbones may cause the powders to transition, the powder eventually stays intact.
What “Sculptures” are capable of being made?
As one turn on the electricity for the sculpture, the iron dust would stick together to trace out the strongest magnetic field like Ivasyuta’s Ring-6. The different poles and strength of magnet would also direct the iron dust to different positions. For example, a part of the sculpture has opposing poles positioning next to each other. The magnetic dust would be forced out of that area. Vice versa, the part of magnet with only a single pole would tend to attract the most iron dust because there is not opposing pole to create controversy.
The idea of Iron Magnetic Volcano is to utilize the special characteristic of iron dust, which sticks to the magnet whose magnetic forces intensity is controlled by the central computer.
We can sculpture a model by piling the iron dust onto the sheet of magnet, whose central point has the most intense magnetic force, hence, creating the volcano shape.
Then, we also place a metal stick, which is wired with circuit as well, in the middle.
As we manipulate, the metal stick rises, and its magnetic force on the tip intensifies, creating an eruption.
Link:
•“Therapy Magnet History.” Profession Technical Services. 2007. Discover Magnetics. 29 Oct. 2007 < http://www.discovermagnetics.com/faq2.html>.
•“Orest Ivasyuta.” Mlidia design studio. 2007 Green Sofa. 28 Oct. 2007 < http://www.artgreensofa.com/a-ivasyuta-e.htm >.
•“Methods of Magnetizing Permanent Magnets.” 2000 Oersted Technology. 28 Oct. 2007 <http://oersted.com/magnetizing.PDF >.
•Delaney, Robert “MLA Citation Style.” 2006 B. Davis Schwartz Memorial Library. 28 Oct. 2007 <http://www.liunet.edu/cwis/cwp/library/workshop/citmla.htm>.
•Marshall Brain. “How Electromagnets Work”. April 01, 2000 How Stuff Works. 29 Oct. 2007 <http://science.howstuffworks.com/electromagnet.htm>.
•Wilson, Tracy V. “How Magnets Work”. April 02, 2007 How Stuff Works 29 Oct. 2007 http://science.howstuffworks.com/magnet.htm>.
•Science Bob. “Build Your Own Electromagnet!” 28 Oct. 2007 <www.sciencebob.com>.
•Gray, Bruce. “Sculpture.” 27 Oct. 2007 <http://www.brucegray.com/>.
Technology and the Other
To begin with, a short, generic description of the Other: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Other . That which is singled out as different, whether as an individual, group, or something else. Otherization has been a long-standing subject of philosophical investigation; prominent thinkers across the years have used the term to describe many things. Here I use the term generally and allusively.
There is an issue with the public discourse on the subject of technology: the public, as a cumulative entity, is rather moronic. Not generally (well, perhaps generally), but in regards to technology. Whether the discussion is on biotechnology, nanotechnology, or some other -technology, there is a clear dichotomy in the masses: those who know, and those who don’t. As David Berube put it (www.ifs.tu-darmstadt.de/fileadmin/phil/nano/berube.pdf), “Contemporary technological discourse is shameful. Leaders who wish to recommend
options and sometimes policy call upon experts. Heavily biased by personal and professional
interests, experts craft their messages so they are resistant to most counterclaims. For
example, by using excessively technical vocabulary, their arguments become arguments
from authority. When asked “why is that true?” their response generally is “Don’t you understand?
I do. I have an advanced degree!” As a result, citizen-consumers are frozen out of
depthful discussions on issues involving science and technology”. Though the reasons for this development in technological rhetoric can be blamed on many causes, the bottom line is that the general public is systematically removed from the technological sphere.
This in some ways seems justified; shouldn’t the highest tier of scientific discussion take place among the highest echelon of qualified scientists? While this may have its merits, one must consider the purpose of science itself. Especially in areas such as this week’s focus of biotech, science is explored for the purpose of potential utility. Science is an industry; innovation is a commodity; and each new technology is a marketable product. In a world dominated by the supply-demand dynamic, it certainly seems odd that the “citizen-consumer”, to quote Berube again, has no say in the pre-implementation policy decisions concerning the future course of scientific advancements. Internationally we already face a digital divide, where developed and undeveloped countries are increasingly separated in terms of technological wealth. Now we face an internal “digital divide” of knowledge and discourse, where the common crowd is fed sensationalist, exaggerated, and oversimplified journalism from the profit-seeking media, while the scientists and researchers hole up in an Ivory Tower built to repel all opponents, political, intellectual, or, inadvertently, those who are neither–us.
This returns us to the Other. First, identification; who is the Other? From the viewpoint from one such as me, I am part of “us”; thus, the guardians of Science must be the Other. Yet in terms of scientific discussion, it is equally clear that the scientists are the dominant group, which would in turn otherize the non-scientific community. A mutual otherization is most certainly not a scenario normally seen. Ordinarily, one group holds power, while the Other is subjugated. The question of who’s who therefore relies on finding out which community truly holds the reins. Settling this power struggle will be a defining moment for scientific progress; in effect, it will determine the exclusion or nonexclusion of ‘the masses’ in the world of Science. Thus we become concerned with the actions of each group.
Reintroducing economic theory, we assume that both groups act rationally, in their own best interest. Also assuming that power is a valued commodity, we can utilize a basic form of game theory. To begin with, we establish the rudimentary risks and rewards for each. The common crowd is at risk of having little to no say in the advancement of technology; and thus the fruits of human achievement will be arbitrarily plucked. Their reward is the ability to direct science and bend its course to their own benefit. For the scientists, the risk is submitting their work to the power of those less-qualified, and being placed under restrictive policies; the reward is freedom.
Game theory would then tell us thusly: although if both groups chose the submissive option (that is, the scientists included non-scientists in policy decision, but non-scientists gave them freedom), both sides could gain rewards, if only one side chose the dominant path, then the other group would be denied this reward. Therefore, the safest option for either would be the dominant strategy. Which, in accordance with the pessimism inherent in economics, leaves all of us worse off.
How depressing.
Cloning
In the week 5 Monday lecture, we briefly went over the subject of cloning. Personally, this is a really creepy topic for me. Science has caught up the phenomenon of reproduction. I find this really scary, as I imagine the world decades ahead from now.. what if the world is overpopulated with clones than people produced naturally. I understand that the science of cloning can be beneficial in ways to ease or prevent extinction of endangered animals. However, it is really spooky to imagine people being married to clones of people, where we will no longer be able to identify who is natural, who is cloned.
Of course, I think the science of cloning is brilliant, and it blows my mind to realize that something was actually biologically cloned. Dolly the sheep was successfully cloned in July of 1996. Cloning is when a a whole animal is produced from a somatic cell. Cloning is normal in plants, and it has been practiced regularly. Cloning in mammals are much more complex. A nuclei from a tadpole has been put into a cytoplasm of a fertilized frog egg, and cloning was possible. In case of Dolly, an ordinary sheep at the time would have a life expectancy of about 11 or 12 years, however, she was diagnosed with arthritis and lung disease. As a result, she passed away at the age of 6, on February 2003. This was not due to the fact that she was cloned, this case was popular among other sheep that were raised indoors, as she was, because of security purposes. Other horses and bulls have been cloned since Dolly, and the practice has been spread and is under more indepth research.
These experiments with the advancement in transgenic animals are mindblowing to comprend. It will be really interesting to watch the sciences advance in the future and see what kind of a world we will be living in…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolly_the_Sheep
http://biotechbuddy.googlepages.com/animal_cloning.html
http://www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/antenna/dolly/index.asp
http://www.roslin.ac.uk/imagelibrary/
http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/elsi/cloning.shtml
Week 5: Midterms, Bio-art
Should artists be allowed to use biotechnology for non-research projects?
Artists can use biotech in their projects to increase awareness about biotechnology. Leonie Bradbury, curator of the Montserrat College of Art, dedicated an entire exhibit to biotech art in March of 2007. The gallery featured the works of numerous biotech artists, including Hunter O’Reilley’s glowing bacteria drawings (which begin to fade and change color as the bacteria die). Art exhibitions such as these are great ways to raise public interest in the field of biotechnology. Although many of the biotech projects are for non-research purposes, they do however give the public hands-on experience with many of the issues that face biotechnologists. For example, one project featured a DNA extraction laboratory. Observers were able to explore the difficult and precise process of DNA extraction first-hand. By allowing observers to interact with their artwork, biotech artists can gain support for future projects and help the public understand the important uses of the biotechnology.
How effective was the midterm project?
I enjoyed seeing all the different projects that people made for their midterms. The assignment encouraged innovation, and allowed students to combine their interests with the topics that we had been exploring during the past four weeks. I took a special interest in the robot biosphere project, where robots were placed in an enclosed environment and programmed to find ways to get energy to keep them running. It would be really interesting to see if a robot could actually be able to sustain itself while in competition with other robots. Other projects that peaked my interest included the kinetic tree, the iron dust sculptures, and the perspective house. As engineers, my project partner and I enjoyed the freedom of this midterm. Instead of having to memorize formulas and concepts, we were able to creatively express ourselves, incorporating ideas we had learned during class. This was a great way to get students interested in the merging fields of art and science.
http://www.eaf.asn.au/biotech/biotech_exhib.html
http://www.the-scientist.com/news/display/52933/
http://www.critical-art.net/biotech/index.html
http://www.genomenewsnetwork.org/articles/08_02/art_hunter.shtml
Midterms and biotech.
Midterms
This was the most interesting and creative type of midterm I have ever taken in any type of class. Since we were the first test subjects, it didn’t go as smoothly as planned. Although we used the time for section, we still did not have enough time to finish all of the presentations. After watching all those presentations, I feel that two minutes is the sweet spot giving enough information to the audience. We should probably split the presentations into two class periods. Maybe we should have the assignment due on a Sunday, then everyone should be ready to present on Monday. No predetermined order is needed because everyone volunteered to go.
I remember one student that was reading her PowerPoint. That person was not able to present all her information. We should emphasize that you shouldn’t read the PowerPoints. I believe that I did hear the professor say that, but it should be emphasized more. The written information on a PowerPoint is usually very scientific and specific. It is not interesting to listen to. The presentations should be told in a way that a normal person without an art or science background can understand.
Bio&Art
I felt that the tissue culture and art project discussed in lecture was pretty interesting. It helped me come up with my idea for the midterm, which involved bacteria. Biologic art is probably going to be a very controversial topic because it includes transgenic animals. Changing the DNA of animals is going to make many people afraid because of Hollywood. A mad scientist’s mutated animal always escapes and finds a way to kill people. It is the same situation as stem cell research. But where is the line between art and a biological experiment? There is no solid distinction.
Wk 5: Self-controlled Robots
During this last week, I was most inspired by the large portion of projects involving robots and their many applications. There were so many different ways that people envisioned using robots. I can’t wait to see what the future has in store for us.
I specifically enjoyed the idea of creating a robot that is equipped with a camera and programing it with guidelines of photography. This I thought was especially great idea because a robot could go out and find places that humans would never even think of finding. If it uses the general guidelines of, for example, the rule of thirds, then the pictures could turn out well enough according to what artists have found people found as ‘good looking.’
The large number of projects involving robots is perhaps the best way to display how much of an interest the rising youth has in them. This is possibly one of the best signs of what direction the future of production will take. Also the United States’ economy and technology has always been influenced by the wars that is in. For example the implementation of the tank during World War II led to the creation of the automobile. So predicting an expansion in the use of robots is not too far of a stretch. Even now the use of robots is becoming more widespread in the military. Their use, however, is restricted to being controlled by remote. I predict that once technology develops that robots will become more common in the daily lives of the common man. If you take the example of a more complex coffee machine, such as one at a Starbucks, those machines can be viewed as low tech remote-controlled robots. They carry out daily functions, and they can do some pretty complex, multi-function tasks.
But how far are we willing to to let robots go? How much control are we willing to give them? There’s not that much difference between giving a robot a camera with specific rules to shoot pictures, and giving them a gun to shoot people. We already have machines that have this setup, except that we do not give them control over the equipment. Sure, there might be a difference in the morals and the danger of creating such machines, but the difference in creating such a machines is trivial. There is not much new technology that is needed to create such machines. An important question to consider about creating science and art is this “Can artists get away with building ‘art’ more easily than scientists can get away with developing the same thing for ’science?’”
As we saw with the GFP Bunny the artist was unable to call the genetically altered rabbit art, but the artist was allowed to create it. Would there have been more debate over the creation of such a creature if it was done in the name of science? Keep in mind that the reason there was so much debate and publicity over the artist’s creation was because it was censored as an art piece.
Midterms!
I thought the idea of presenting projects for our midterm was interesting to say the least. The part that I liked most about it is the fact that you could sort of live out your most interesting idea, without regard to the cost of the real project, and still be able to present it to the class. I was never the one who brought in the really nice diorama in second grade. I always had good (I hope) ideas for projects, but never had the artistic ability to make them realities. What I liked about this project was the fact that I could simply present the idea without having to attempt to glue popsicle sticks together.
The most interesting presentation to me was the DNA and music presentation. Although things like this have been done before, I found it interesting that he actually made a song from DNA. The musical representation of the chemical basis of life is a direct representation of art, science, and technology. Aside from that, I felt every project was, although standardized, interesting in its own way. There were plenty of presentations that I saw that made me think “wow, I would have never thought of that.”
My only gripe with the presentations was the fact that they were shortened down to one minute. Perhaps if we spread presentations out over two days, everyone could have ample time to present their idea. Obviously, one minute limited what everyone wanted to say, and I feel that many ideas could have been more clear and seemed more interesting if more time were to be allotted.
Genetic Modification and Interaction
I was very impressed with Peter Chang’s idea about an interactive way of learning through the experimentation of modifying DNA to create a creature on a projected screen. Although it might not have been as creative as other unfathomable projects, this project definitely has great potential. We already have the technology to do all that was mentioned; just a bit of research is required to classify all the DNA sequences as to show a visualization of any DNA at any given point and time. Genetic modification has already been done and is still undergoing much evolution, but this idea of virtually modifying DNA can be much more efficient and clean than our current methods of approach. Also, this gives students and kids a safe alternative to learning hands-on about DNA without each person having to share slides, microscopes, tours to the science labs, etc.
I would really like to carry this project idea even further. What if we were able to not only classify an organism by its DNA structure, but create DNA through selected traits? This would be reversing the structure in which Peter’s proposal was carried out, so both options are available to its users. You would be able to describe the description of a banana, and then the DNA of a banana would appear. You would then make a suitable description of a human being, and see that the DNA of a human and banana are 50% identical to each other… and other fascinating facts that scientists nowadays are afraid of sharing, since we believe ourselves to be very different from bananas, not 50% alike. Evolution…?
I believed the midterm was amazing, and I learned a lot from what people shared. It really gets you thinking about HOW to think, not what to know much like what is taught in other classes. This midterm was a fun alternative to a written essay that restricts you to the prompt of the essay and grammar rather than exploring the true ideas behind what one is trying to express.
Week 5- Midterms
Reflecting on the Midterms
The midterm projects I thought were very interesting. I really enjoyed the interactive assignment that we were given that allowed us to express our creative ideas. In addition I felt that the project allowed us to fuse the ideas together of art, science, and technology. I have always preferred to do hands on projects. I feel that I learn more by actively participating in what I am studying. That is why I am more of a scientist, because in my experience there have been more hands on learning. For example, in chemistry we did labs in which we got to work with different chemicals and actually got to see the reaction taking place. However, my experiences with art have not been so hands on. A lot of times it involved learning about the history of artists and their work, which I find boring compared to actually working on a project myself.
That is what I found appealing about this midterm (which is weird because you don’t hear too often about people liking midterms). It allowed me to better understand the connection between art, science, and technology by creating a project myself that incorporated aspects of all of these categories. It was really interesting to come up with a project myself and to see what everyone else in the class was able to create. Even more interesting was that most of the projects were really different. Even if the projects were based in the same field, the proposals that everyone created were really unique. From the Terminatrix to the future soldier to the perspective house, it was really interesting to see how other people were able to fuse the areas of art, science, and technology.
The project goes back to the first week, with the third culture. This project allowed us to become members of it. I have traditionally considered myself to be purely a scientist, but now I feel that I am closer to being a part of the third culture. I cannot in any way call myself an artist, for there is a lot about art that I just do not understand. But I can see that there is definitely a connection between art, science, and technology. Thus, I am moving closer to becoming a member of the third culture. Even if I do not understand art, I can at least appreciate it and make an attempt at figuring it out.
Biotechnology: How good is it?
In recent years there has been a lot of work done with genetics and other areas of the biotech industry. Many of these projects and discoveries are wonderful to help the human race. Research to find a cure for cancer, or to be able to clone human tissue and organs will be extremely beneficial to humanity. Countless numbers of lives can be saved with such technology. Nevertheless, there is a definite downside to genetic engineering. With people living longer than they already do, it will only increase some problems that we are already facing. For example, the world is already beginning to face problems of overpopulation, food shortages, and so forth. Having people live longer with birthing rates staying the same will only increase these problems.
In addition, some of the things that people are doing with genetic research I find to be disturbing. For example, in the lecture on Monday we were introduced to a project involving a human ear, grown in a lab, which is going to be attached to the arm of a person. I fail to see the scientific purpose of this or to understand any reasoning behind it at all. To me it is just disturbing. There are many good things that genetic research can be used for, but I do not think that this is one of them.
Week 5 – Peter Chang
Midterms
Just to reflect on this week’s midterms, I have to say that doing something like this is a much more effective approach to the study of the class’ subject matter. It allowed me personally to combine what I thought was important in science and the world into a piece of art. The project also helped me form skills such as condensing research topics into tiny presentations of one minute. I’m sure that it is much more interesting to the teachers and graders to do such an exam this way.
There was one problem though and that was what I thought about the number of sources we needed to incorporate into our project. Many of us seemed like we were trying to grasp very broad subject areas such as music or robotics. My project, which was on genetic engineering, seemed like it didn’t really need too much research into specifics. I based my concept originally on three articles talking about controversies in genetic engineering then found about four more interesting articles talking about the subject. But to make up for the lack of 20 articles, I ended up searching for relevant websites after I had already finished the project. I’m sure we could’ve had a more in-depth project but we were only allotted about half a week, so there really wasn’t sufficient time to do any deep research.
Other than that, I really liked watching all the projects. Although I can’t recall the hundred or so presentations, I thought many of the projects had very analytical, interesting, and humorous, things to say.
Midterms
The Midterms
I was very impressed with the project ideas that the class presented. Without exception, every single idea presented had some very interesting points. Some of the product/invention ideas would be very beneficial to humankind if they were ever manufactured. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if some technologies go into production in the near future that are very similar to those introduced in class. Other projects were less practical but were just as inspiring. Ideas for art exhibits using robotics and user interaction definitely opened my eyes to ways in which art can be expressed. Overall, I thought that the whole ordeal was a big success. The assignment forced us to think outside of the box, further closing the inherent gap in our minds between the arts and the sciences. Congrats to all my classmates on their great projects and to our professor and TA’s for saving us from a boring blue book midterm.
Tensegrity/Magnetic Rehab Project
One of the proposals that I was most impressed with was the idea that involved tensegrity and using magnets to heal various medical conditions, such as reshaping red blood cells in folks with sickle cell anemia or correcting tumors in those with cancer. I thought this project had it all. It was a very unique idea that could potentially become a reality in the future. Furthermore, this idea, if ever actually produced, could save thousands of lives and relieve the suffering of countless more. It was also very well presented. I thought all of the projects were very interesting, and there were several others that stood out, but this project left the most lasting impression. I’m sorry I don’t know the name of who created this project, but whoever you are, you did a great job.
Week Five: Thoughts on Midterm Presentations
the future of science
The largest feeling I drew from the midterm presentations was one of awe given the prospect of such an exciting future. There are so many fields of research just waiting for ambitious persons to tackle. As far-fetched as some of the project proposals were, they all reminded me of what the future of science and technology has to offer. Nanotech, in particular fascinates me. The presentation about carbon nanotubes, while completely unrealistic, does bring up interesting ideas about using super-strong nanotech fibers/metals in armors. It will also be interesting to see how the future of robotics and nanotech addresses our current energy woes. The presentation about robotic bio-fuel harvesters seemed like a semi-realistic idea of what could happen in the future as our energy needs increase along with progression of robotic AI. In addition to biofuels, it would be interesting to see how robots will displace traditional agriculture. I wonder how long it will take for agriculture to be completely mechanized.
The future of art
While many mediums of art tend to use the same basic technologies over the years, the computer graphics world is in perpetual change. The presentations, while a lot of them weren’t about art, made me think about how much advances in science translate to advancements in computer graphics. My forays into fluid dynamics simulation (Nextlimit’s Realflow, mostly) furthered my appreciation of science’s involvement in cg. It even made me want to take fluid dynamics classes and hardcore physics tends to scare me. Science even filters into my other medium – photography. New advances happen all the time in optics that lead to better lenses and better camera bodies. Not that I can really afford any of them.
