Plastic Futures will hosikian Semester 2 intensive, June 19 - July 26 2009.

Elective Pamphlets

1

a digital tropism

When undertaking the plastic futures elective at RMIT my main focus was drawn towards biomimicry and the relation-ships between the natural evo-lution of a species in the real world vs the digital systems that can mimic or replicate a natural device or system in the virtual.

The aim was to generate a systemic growth that would combine the characteristics of two species. The systemic approach thus acted as more of an agent of simulacra where the subject matter being explored or tested in the digital world could evolve or allow for error in the systemic build inherent at a seed level.

What I mean by seed is the initial characteristics inherent within the original unevolved kernel. A basis with basic rules that allow for a directional growth but always with an element of error or un-pro-grammed outcome, so that from a single gene or kernel multiple variation could arise in the evo-lution of several species from the same initial seedling.the interesting biomimic aspect of the project becomes this miniscule percentage of error or randomness which gives rise to new unintentional- ‘non-designed’ species.

In the natural world however the percentage of error usually exists in 2 realms. The fi rst: a microbial anomaly or mutation at a chromosome level within the seed. The second: which is more typical is the notion of a tropistic evolution. Tropism typically means that over time, plant or animal life evolves or changes state to cater for its own survival. We see ele-ments of this in plant t life on a day to day basis where a vein would chose to fi nd an adjacent structure to grow in a spiralling upward nature to support itself or collapse. Or in the move-ment of the face of a leaf or fl ower where it orients itself for optimal exposure to the sun for photosynthesis.

The latter option is more typical of the two; however the evolution of a given species occurs over a much longer duration and in time the basic characteristics at a genetic level evolve to its requirements of regular recurring tropisms. It is also arguable that a truly evolved species of plant or animal life is the subject of both, the recurring tropistic requirements of the species force a mutation at its genetic level over time and slight varia-tions in both give rise to a vast multiplicity of new species.bo

3

The idea of looking at the evo-lution of a digital plant species came from the visit to Mandu-rah in Perth, where we became familiar with the thrombolite & stromatolite population.

The basic cellular organisa-tional difference between both organisms over time in cross section show the stromatolite has more of a stacked arrange-ment whereas the thrombolite cellular organisation is quite chaotic nesting in a way where chaos still has fi nite order.

After discussing the impending inevitability that the envi-ronmental conditions would change drastically over time, slowly killing the prehistoric bacteria formations, further-more discussing the pending water level rise that would eliminate some of the na-tive plan species, I wrote a fi ctional piece that combined the genetics of both natural systems where one borrowed the strengths of the other.

The objective was to simulate a speculation where thrombolite formations could grow as rap-idly as recursive plant life. The new organisms are divided in 2 categories based on organised cellular arrangement : regular surface topology or chaotic cel-lular organisation.

The fi ctional essay went on to talk about how humans would seek shelter using them as new spaces for habitation when the species matured and water level rose eliminating the use of the typical ground plane surround-ing the Margaret River.

Both seeds (random vs. layered topology) is subjected to forces or ‘digital tropisms’, generally a directional growth upward and outward. After a point both species take on very different form based on the initial cel-lular composition.

When initially attempting to set up a script to do this it became apparent that it would take months of research to accurately produce such a digital simulation. However using a stacked system in 3ds Max would provide a much faster and visual response to the design experiment. It creates a knock on effect as each level of growth has a characteristic which affects the second and third evolutions of the species. A single change in any of the evolutions visualises a highly varied result but related back to the parent seedling.

The system is animated so the growth is visible over short du-ration. The following portfolio compiles some of the iterations and resultant plant/thrombolite agglomerated species.

Interestingly a cellular com-position or inherent surface topology in plant life can be compared to that of a design language that an architect might employ. We discussed the inherent diamond grid that resonates in the work of Nor-man Foster Architects vs the chaotic fractal organisation that is adopted by Lab Architecture Studio. Essentially a surface/ facade system or topological organisation is inherent in both practices.

When asked to analyse what the seed of Zaha Hadid’s work might be I concluded that her studio was more interested in a linear vector based geom-etry, where surface topology is absent, however the formal outcomes were manoeuvres with a beginning and an end, no regular or recursive subdivi-sion.

\\\\\\\\will hosikian

Thrombolite Stromatolite

5

?

Species A

Thrombolite <random - chaotic - nested - cellular organisation>

7

Species B

Stromatolite<layered - ordered - regular - cellular organisation>

1.1Initial evolution of Stromatolite layered seed

1.2Stromatolite layered seed topology

1.0 seedSpecies B:

<layered - ordered - regular - cellular organisation>

1.3Stromatolite layered seed topology - Iteration 2

11

1.4Stromatolite layered seed topology - Iteration 3

13

1.5Directional growth a

1.5Directional growth b

1.5Directional growth c

1.5Surface Tessalation

14

2.1Directional growth a

2.2Directional growth b

2.3Directional growth c

2.4Directional growth d

2.0 evolution aSpecies B:

<layered - ordered - regular - cellular organisation>

Species B:<layered - ordered - regular - cellular organisation>

3.1Directional growth a

3.2Directional growth b

3.3Directional growth c

3.4Directional growth d

3.0 evolution bSpecies B:

<layered - ordered - regular - cellular organisation>

3.5 Detail

4.1Directional growth a

4.2Directional growth b

4.3Directional growth c

4.4Directional growth d

4.0 evolution aSpecies A:

<random - chaotic - nested - cellular organisation>

Species A:<random - chaotic - nested - cellular organisation>

5.1Directional growth a

5.2Directional growth b

5.3Directional growth c

5.4Directional growth d

5.0 evolution bSpecies A:

<random - chaotic - nested - cellular organisation>

5.6Detail

5.7Iteration a

5.9Detail

5.8Iteration b

6.1Thrombolite seed growth progression

6.2Directional growth a

6.3Directional growth b

6.4Directional growth c

6.0 evolution cSpecies A:

<random - chaotic - nested - cellular organisation>

6.5Detail a - tropism a

6.5Detail b - tropism b

will hosikian