Outlining the Big T

I stayed up all last night trying to organize some sense of the mess that is my thesis, and after careful consideration of what i had produced and I found that there was a fundamental idea that although not well executed, I am excited about confronting. I suppose this new lense trickled into my perspective, after sitting in on a critique for Paz Guttierez's 100A studio, when Nicholas described the ability of structures to adapt to changing unexpected conditions. He referred to the word Robustness. "Money!" is all i could think. How appropriate a word to use as a metric for contemporary architecture, specially when we are finding that it as a profession is beginning to understand the research and studies of other fields and what the implications of such findings can have on the practice of architecture. That the complexity of design can begin to be actuated as a biological one, again supports the metric of Robust.

In my thesis I have defined what I am terming degrees of robustness. I use degrees to refer and quote the idea of degrees of motion. Meaning that more degrees you have the wider the breath of movement. In terms of Robustness, the higher the degree, the larger the span of flexibility and adaptability.

1 degree= Smart surfaces. The surface is static but through its continuity and informing by the fourth dimension of vectors, it carries with it multiplicity of program.

2 degree= Movement of parts. There is no statis but through actuated movement, discrete moments are defined.

3 degree= responsiveness to changing conditions. Movement or change is induced by variable outside the system but yet the system is capable of adapting to those positions.