广西科技大学毕业设计（论文）外文翻译课题名称 Architecture, Patterns, and Mathematics结构·形态·数学模数 学 院 土木建筑工程学院专 业 建 筑 学 班 级 建筑 091班 学 号 200900503014 姓 名 土 志 璇 指导教师 卢琳彬、罗锐东 2014年 3 月 24 日原文：Architecture, Patterns, and MathematicsNikos Salingaros posits the importance of architectural pattern in man’s intellectual development, examining how twentieth century architectural attitudes towards decoration and pattern have impoverished man’s experience of both mathematics and the built environment.IntroductionThe traditionally intimate relationship between architecture and mathematics changed in the twentieth century. Architecture students are no longer required to have a mathematical background. While a problem in itself, a far more serious possibility is that contemporary architecture and design may be promoting an anti-mathematical mind-set. The modernist movement suppresses pattern in architecture, and this has profound implications for societyas a whole. Mathematics is a science of patterns, and the presence or absence of patterns in our surroundings influences how easily one is able to grasp concepts that rely on patterns. Eliminating patterns from twentieth-century architecture affects our capacity to process and interpret patterns in thought. Mathematics, and the intellectual patterns it embodies, lie outside our contemporary, explicitly anti-pattern architectural world-view.Mathematics teachers are bemoaning the fact that there is less and less interest inmathematics, which has resulted in a declining mathematical capacity among students. This stands in sharp contrast - indeed a contradiction - with the increasing technological advances we are witnessing in our times. Here, it is proposed that an environmental factor might contribute to the overall decline of mathematics in our society. This theory arose from the author’s interest in the theoretical basis behind architectural styles from different periods and regions. It has recently been shown how traditional architectures obey rules that are intrinsically mathematical . Those rules lead to buildings that, whatever their form, encapsulate to a greater or lesser extent multiple mathematical qualities and information. The architecture of the twentieth century has achieved novelty, and a break with the past, precisely by eliminating those qualities.In this paper, the word “pattern” denotes a regularity in some dimension. The simplest examples are repeated visual units ordered with translational (linear) or rotational symmetry. Patterns also exist in a scaling dimension, where similar forms occur at different magnification.When geometric self-similarity is defined on a hierarchy of scales, a self-similar fractal is created. The concept of a pattern also extends to solution space, in that solutions to similar problems are themselves related and define a single template that repeats - with some variation every time such a problem is solved. The underlying idea is to reuse information; whether in repeating a unit to generate a two-dimensional tiling design, or in reusing the general solution to a class of differential equations.Environmental psychologists know that our surroundings influence not only the way we think, but also our intellectual development. Ordered mathematical information in the environment generates positive emotional responses. If we are raised in an environment that is implicitly anti-mathematical, that adversely affects our interest in mathematics; possibly even our ability to grasp mathematical concepts. Does spending one’s whole life in a pattern-less world weaken or even destroy the crucial capacity to form patterns? Even though the definitive answer to this question is not known, its implications are alarming. While there is very strong criticism of contemporary architecture for its lack of human qualities, the present criticism goes far deeper. This is not an argument about design preferences or styles; it concerns the trained functionality of the human mind.A science of patternsMathematics is a science of patterns. The mind perceives connections and interrelations between concepts and ideas, then links them together. The ability to create patterns is a consequence of our neural development in responding to our environment. Mathematical theories explain the relations among patterns that arise within ordered, logical structures. Patterns in the mind mimic patterns in nature as well as man-made patterns, which is probably how human beings evolved so as to be able to do mathematics. Mankind generates patterns out of some basic inner need: it externalizes connective structures generated in the mind via the process of thinking, which explains the ubiquitousness of visual patterns in the traditional art and architecture of mankind.Patterns in time are also essential to human intellectual development. Daily activity is organized around natural rhythms. Annual events become a society’s fixed points. Moreover, these often link society to an emerging scientific understanding of periodic natural phenomena such as seasons and their effects. Mathematics itself arose out of the need to chronicle observed patterns in space and time. On smaller scales, repeating gestures become theater and dance, and are incorporated into myth, ritual, and religion. The development of voice and music responds to the need to encapsulate rhythmic patterns and messages. All of these activities occur as patterns on the human range of time scales.Complex physical and chemical systems are known to generate patterns in space or time, as a result of self-organization. The system’s organized complexity is manifested on a macroscopic scale as perceivable patterns. This is not only true for the innumerable static patterns found in nature; patterns also represent collective motions or other forms of organized, dissipative behavior. The observation of steady-state patterns in dynamic systems is often indicative of the system assuming an optimal state for energy transfer (examplesinclude convection cells, ocean currents, and whirlpools in rivers). By contrast, there is very little going on in a homogeneous state.Before the era of mass education, and for a great many people still today, architectural patterns represent one of the few primary contacts with mathematics. Tilings and visual patterns are a “visible tip” of mathematics, which otherwise requires learning a special language to understand and appreciate. Patterns manifest the innate creative ability and talent that all human beings have for mathematics. The necessity for patterns in the visual environment of a developing child is acknowledged by child psychologists as being highly instrumental. One specific instance of traditional material culture, oriental carpets, represent a several-millennia-old discipline of creating and reproducing visual patterns. A close link exists between carpet designs and mathematical rules for organizing complexity. A second example, floor pavements in Western architecture, is now appreciated as being a repository - hence, a type of textbook for its time - of mathematical information.Alexandrine patterns as inherited architectural solutionsAn effort to define patterns in solution space was made by Christopher Alexander and his associates, by collecting architectural and urban solutions into the Pattern Language. These distill timeless archetypes such as the need for light from two sides of a room; a well-defined entrance; interaction of footpaths and car roads; hierarchy of privacy in the different rooms of a house, etc. The value of Alexander’s Pattern Language is that it is not about specific building types, but about building blocks that can be combined in an infinite number of ways. This implies a more mathematical, combinatoric approach to design in general. Unfortunately, this book is not yet used for a required course in architecture schools.Alexandrine patterns represent solutions repeated in time and space, and are thus akin to visual patterns transposed into other dimensions. Every serious discipline collects discovered regularities into a corpus of solutions that forms its foundation. Science (and as a result, mankind) has advanced by cataloguing regularities observed in natural processes, to create different subjects of ordered knowledge. The elimination of visual patterns, as discussed later, creates a mind set that values only unique, irreproducible cases; that has the consequence of eliminating all patterns, visual ones as well as those occurring in solution space. Fortunately, the structural solutions that architects depend upon remain part of engineering, which preserves its accumulated knowledge for reuse.Basic laws for generating coherent buildings follow Alexander’s more recent work.Successful buildings obey the same system laws as a complex organism and an efficient computer program. This author’s theoretical results, which support the efforts of Alexander, may eventually become part of a core body of architectural knowledge. The design of common buildings is already being taken over by the users themselves in the case of residential buildings, or by the contractors of commercial buildings. Builders have developed their own repertoire of (usually very poor) architectural patterns, motivated by the desire to minimize cost and standardize components rather than to optimize usability. Architects increasingly design only “showcase” buildings, which are featured in the architectural magazines, but represent a vanishing percentage of what is actually built today.Architectural education tends to focus on trying to develop “creativity”. A student is urged to invent new designs - with the severe constraint not to be influenced by anything from the past - but is not taught how to verify if they are solutions. This approach ignores and suppresses patterns in solution space. Contemporary architectural theory can only validate designs by how closely they conform to some arbitrary stylistic dictate. The only way to avoidcoming back to traditional architectural patterns - which work so well - is to block thedeductive process that relates an effect with its cause. By deliberately ignoring theconsequences of design decisions, architectural and urban mistakes are repeated over and over again, with the same disastrous consequences each time.Mathematics and architectureHistorically, architecture was part of mathematics, and in many periods of the past, the two disciplines were indistinguishable. In the ancient world, mathematicians were architects whose constructions -- the pyramids, ziggurats, temples, stadia, and irrigation projects -- we marvel at today. In Classical Greece and ancient Rome, architects were required to also be mathematicians. When the Byzantine emperor Justinian wanted an architect to build the Hagia Sophia as a building that surpassed everything ever built before, he turned to two professors of mathematics (geometers), Isidoros and Anthemios, to do the job . This tradition continued into the Islamic civilization. Islamic architects created a wealth of two-dimensional tiling patterns centuries before western mathematicians gave a complete classification.Medieval masons had a strong grasp of geometry, which enabled them to construct the great cathedrals according to mathematical principles. It is not entirely fair to dismiss the middle ages as being without mathematics: their mathematics is built into structures instead of being written down. The regrettable loss of literacy during those centuries was most emphatically not accompanied by a commensurate loss of visual or architectural patterns, because patterns (as opposed to the abstract representations of a written script) reflect processes that are inherent in the human mind.We are interested here in what happened in the twentieth century. The Austrian architect Adolf Loos banned ornament from architecture in 1908 with these preposterous, unsupported statements: The evolution of culture is synonymous with the removal of ornament from utilitarian objects. ...not only is ornament produced by criminals but also a crime is committed through the fact that ornament inflicts serious injury on people’s health, on the national budget and hence on cultural evolution. ...Freedom from ornament is a sign of spiritual strength. This hostile, racist sentiment was shared by the Swiss architect Le Corbusier:Decoration is of a sensorial and elementary order, as is color, and is suited to simpleraces, peasants and savages.... The peasant loves ornament and decorates his walls. Thus they condemned the material culture of mankind from all around the globe,accumulated over millennia. While these condemnations may seem actions of merely stylistic interest, in fact they had indirect but serious consequences. The elimination of ornament removes all ordered structural differentiations from the range of scales 5mm to 2m or thereabouts. That corresponds to the human scale of structures, i.e., the sizes of the eye, finger, hand, arm, body, etc. In the Modernist design canon, patterns cannot be defined on those scales. Therefore, modernism removes mathematical information from the built environment. Looking around at twentieth century buildings, one is hard-pressed to discover visual patterns. Indeed, their architects go to great lengths to disguise patterns on human scales that are inevitable because of the activities in a building; they arise in the materials, and as a consequence of structural stability and weathering.It is useful to distinguish between abstract patterns in plan, and perceivable patterns on building facades, walls, and pavements. Only the latter influence human beings directly, because they are seen and experienced instantaneously. Symmetries in a building’s plan are not always observable, even if the structure is actually an open plaza, because of the perspective, position, and size of a human being. In a normal walled building, the pattern of its plan is largely hidden from view by the built structure. A user has to reconstruct a building’s plan in the mind; i.e., it is perceivable intellectually, and only after much effort. Visual patterns have the strongest emotional and cognitive impact when they are immediately accessible.Architectural counter-argumentsBooks on architectural history emphasize how Modernist twentieth-century architecture is rational, being founded on mathematical principles. The writings of the early modernists fail, however, to reveal any mathematical basis. Proposing pure geometric solids as “mathematical” is totally simplistic. If one looks hard enough, one comes away with a few unstated principles deduced from the buildings themselves. One of these is hierarchy reversal: “build structures on a large scale that are natural only on the small scale; they then appear out of place, and therefore novel.” This reasoning produces giant pyramids and rectangular bo
展开阅读全文