Recently, while researching through an oxygen bomb structure that could transform the life on Mars, I also discovered an interesting pattern in developing an Invisible army armor. This invisible army Armour is special because it can deflect light particles which makes it invisible.
Because the structure of the invisible army Armour is made from Boron and Carbon it can be used in combat as a heavy duty shield.
Now the structure Boron is a perfect bond for the electrons to create bonds with the carbon electrons which use only 1/3 of their energy to encapsulate the links. The 2/3 of the energy is stored in the electrons which makes them to absorb to the light particles. This way the link between boron and carbon is strong, but it creates the diamond light pass effect.
As you can see in the picture bellow, the structure of the material follows a pattern that it is similar with the diamond one shape.
Now, the diamond shape has been designed in such a way that it absorbs light only from one side. As for the other side, the structure does not reflect entirely. The material is solid, as any other body armor.
What are the benefits of an Invisible army armor?
With this structure we can make objects to cloak based on their position with the observer. As an example, when this is applied to a tank, the object becomes fully invisible on a perpendicular trajectory with the object. The object can be invisible up to a degree of 120, from where it becomes fully solid.
So how this works? Basically, the object can transform the light trajectory through a system of angled connections which makes the light to be bounced on surface. The electrons of the connections which make the surface, they absorb light, thus the surface is completely invisible. The light in a diamond structure is absorbed by its electrons. Here the light is bounced from surface to surface until the exit point and it is being absorbed by the electrons.
Now, from a soldier perspective this will give the benefit of an army to become fully hidden into enemy territory. More or less, it advances any position on ground, air and space.
Invisible armour. Know the hide from inside.
If you’d be interested in buying the technology, please do not hesitate to contact Andrei Toma for more details.
Back in 2009 when we started this research, we looked in depth at cellular expansions through space and we’ve found that they have an amazing ability to transfer information from one to the other. Now, you might think that the information is transferred the way space is transferred and that the fabric of space holds the sequences of these expansions and therefore, a valid point to suggest that the space is in fact the memory. We know how to create it, but we don’t know how it has been created. The questions through which we hope to unfold a fabric of space.
What is AIS?
AIS is a basic experimental model which acts as a post and beam structure from point 0 to almost infinite. Being able to calculate its own weight, the structure is defining new points of expansion through clusters that quantify three models from our living environment. These clusters are work, live and green.
The structure is also flexible, while its joints are fixed, the post and beam system works perfectly to accommodate movement, while the holes which are left in the expansion connect with other structural supports that takes the place of the bones. AIS is no more than a fabric, which is flexible and can be adapted to cover the ‘bone’s and act as a skin, but also a structure.
Where can be applied?
AIS has been tested in virtual environments and worked for the formation of cities and as mentioned above, robots. This can be adapted and other applications in research because it softness the articulations and a new line in portability can be set.
AIS works very well for property developers and it cuts cost down and also can be 3D printed. The supply chain, the manufacture process and the execution is above any other system.
If you’d like to discover more about the model, you can contact Andrei Toma on 02034758995.
The opportunities which new mapping technologies afford the architect and the urban designer throughout architectural practices offers the capabilities in decomposing the existing architectural image to integrate the human interaction. Offering to the architect the possibility articulate the mechanics of living, adapting to the technological environment while conceptualizing and transferring the the image of the nature to become the tool in organizing compositions and spaces in interior, exterior and urban design for further generations.
The technological environment has provided to the architect the tools in developing the architectural image by extending the image of architecture through various media and wired capabilities.
The new enhanced material capabilities afford the architect to better structure the realm of possibilities, providing more interaction between nature and the built form, a jungle matrix through the architectural image provided by the theories of Peter Eisenman, Antonio Saggio and Derick de Kerchove, which will provide the analysis for the materials with memory capacity.
Man has built spaces, interpreted after the natural form, transferring the graphical reproduction of the natural form into architectural form as described by the theories of David Gissen and the conceptual thought of John Tierney and Dan O’Sullivan.
Human interaction is essential for architect in developing spaces, such as the new mapping technologies would inter-connect the mechanical and the computational generating new sets of forms and surfaces articulated throughout dwellings and urban environments; structural thought provided by Patrick Schumacher and Brett Steele from Architectural Association London and related dwelling case studies of Le Corbusier.
Another urban development is analysed by the University of Tokyo, and on which senses of the places become the realm of structural and functional understanding to bridge the tools for the architect to cultivate architecture’s other environments into integrated places, mapping and integrating the architecture’s environments into the whole building continuum.
Man and the technological environment
“We cultivate and theorize our technological environment today in strange and partial ways, without ever admitting to ourselves that this is what it is, an environment. ” (Kwinter, Sanford 2007:18)
Architecture is the product of our imagination, as Leon van Schaik (2008) has mentioned, ‘architecture is a product of mental space’, which brings together the world, to generate the connections in developing extensive environments, in which we live and share as a community as Furion Barzon (2003) has mentioned.
The mental space is the place where man engages into the journey through space. Dan O’Sullivan (1994) has mentioned, man would engage into its journey to constantly looking for points and signage to interact with, engaging in connected relations between nature and the built environment, engaging into matrix of possibilities as Peter Eisenman (2003) points out.
The journey offers the representation of the projected consciousness, in other terms the built reality, which is in fact a product of repetitive information packets interacting through the built environment into one physical environment as Derrick de Kerchove (2001) points out.
“The architecture of intelligence is the architecture of connectivity. It is the architecture that brings together the three main spatial environments that we live in and with today : mind, world and networks. “ (Derrick de Kerchove 2001:7)
The architectural image developed by interacting connections within our mental space becomes the product in sensing the spatial environments, to become the main interaction into extending the boundary of the architectural image, as Peter Eisenman (2003) has mentioned.
The projected image becomes the main spatial environment in which we live, and which is transferring the mind, the world and the network into becoming the system of connection, as Derrick de Kerchove (2001) has mentioned.
The architecture of intelligence which engages into being the information package embedded with artificial networks, interpreted as infrastructure between physical and the virtual, as Peter Eisenman (2003) points out.
“Connected architecture tackles the management of thresholds and infrastructures between first the physical and the virtual space, but ultimately also the thresholds between mental and virtual spaces even as more and more designers are called upon to interpret new cognitives possibilities.” (Kerchove, de Derick 2001:18)
The projected image of architecture becomes the image of the intelligent architecture. It is consisting of information clusters which is connecting multiple instances of time between different thresholds, between mental and virtual as Derrick de Kerchove (2001) points out, between solid and fluid.
FIG.1 Intelligent environment characteristics (Addington and Shcodek 2005)
The parameters of reasoning and evaluation as defined in Fig.1 reflect within our mental space producing the visual structure which is managing our view and our perception of the built environment through the surrounding space. The interaction between space and the perception of the build environment, is developing the sensorial synthesis, as Paul Adam (2007) has mentioned, ‘the sensorial synthesis is based and formed from patterns interacting impressions, sensations and ideas’.
The sensorial synthesis is the organizational mechanism which is developed not only to give us the sense of space, but also to place us inside, and outside the inhabited space, and in the atmosphere within our physical environment, as shown in Fig.1. It constitutes models for implemented awareness through the organizational mechanism.
“The image of the building boundary as the demarcation between two different environments defined as single states – a homogeneous interior and an ambient exterior – could possibly be replaced by the idea of multiple energy environments fluidly interacting with the moving body.” (Addington and Shcodek 2005:8)
The building boundary of the built environment as Addington and Shcodek (2005) points out is the demarcation between different homogeneous and ambient states of intersecting bodies through space. The interaction generated by the moving body through this particular environment would create multiple energy points, defined as environments which would fluidly interact with the organizational components of the system.
“Embedded within the virtual structure’ (Abstract space, 2007:21), elegance strives for differentiation in dynamic order, examined between expression of values, as Antonio Saggio (2003) points out, and their internal function within the structure concept.
Tendency is to process the virtual into logical cognition and expression as Peter Eisenman (2003) points out, opening characteristics that should attract the social forces into becoming the potential for complexity in change and growth over time.
An essential part of this interrogation between complex and uncertain is relying on perception of the architectural image, that is reflecting on investigations which were developed by fixed meanings: ‘architecture as infrastructure, as interface, as a system of interconnection’ (de Kerkhove, Derrick, 2001:88), distributed at the boundary between art and science, which occurred over time in our history, as an accumulation in time that determined our perception of space.
“At present, the digital is an interface between cognition and expression. With the integration of digital methods, primarily through new media animation software, it is possible to view design acts not only as an on-going process within a larger continuum but potentially as ends in themselves. As substantial DeLanda’s writing, form is always subject to its own internal process, so always becoming. Actualization may be not necessary, or even possible. This stands in contrast to historical views that examined the architectural drawing as a material artefact (albeit a product of social forces).’ (Tierney, John 2007:21)
The accumulation in time in which our perception had developed within the perception of the architectural image, has been, as in animation software packages, manipulated by a coordinate of time.
Time is exponential, ‘change, reversible and reversible’ (Steele, Bret, 2001:15) and storage. This could be patterned by the mass production of goods and services as John Bird (1993) points out, which create an increase in memory storage, by extending the boundary in which we share as a community, as Breet Stele (2001) has mentioned.
The mapping of physical environments it is essential in developing close related spaces to generate efficient connections between occupants and their possible connection in space.
In other words, time has accumulated the information and had generated history and the host. If we generate an ‘articulation’ (Patrick Schumacher, 2007) between time and the logical ‘complexity’ (Patrick Schumacher, 2007), this new fields would extend towards the new ways of developing spaces, as Brett Steele (2001) points out. Space at this instance in time becomes fully interacting with the bodies. As Brett Steele (2001) points out, subjects interacting within the hole continuum should articulate the needs in which they share the most.
Patterns as eating, sleeping, relaxing, becomes the maps in developing embedded spaces, which fully react to the interacting body through space.
By compressing the capsule of space, dividing and assimilating common needs under the same cluster, space becomes efficient as, shown by Brett Steele (2001).
If this gives the point of interaction with the built environment and the natural ecosystem, the connection necessary to place them seamless together, is located within the architectural design.
In this view, a representation of moments through duration, ‘emphasising the analytical ability of the mind’ (de Kerchove, Derrick, 2001:89) is generating idealized static objects located in fixed spaces, creating fixed logical links as Brett Steele (2001) points out.
This connection could be the link between the complexity of our natural environment and the architectural image.
“Screens, connections, and electronic interfaces are all around us and live contemporaneously in flexible organizations and trans-typologies. Architecture takes on life; it becomes an electronic and interactive organism, a new type of space is coming to light, indifferently real or simulated, two dimensional or three dimensional, the space makes everything contiguous, mixed, contaminated. The sense of things is dispersed in an uncontrolled dissemination. Velocity is no longer physical but is the thought, absolute” (Barzon, Furion 2003:10)
The embedded space, linking all the interfaces and components into one electronic device, developing and assimilating the traces of our movements and behaviours through space. The of information in packets of rules, codes, forces, separated into categories to be accessible and at the same time transferable.
These groups of packets, are connected, as Steele Brett (2001) points out, leaving the connection between human and electronic interfaces, to creatively develop connected and flexible organizations.
World Wide Web introduces the elaboration of new multiplicity, cross-operable electronic interfaces, which becomes the fundamental boundary between human interaction and virtual interactive space, suggesting the exploration of form as Brett Steele (2001) points out, to blend the World Wide Web, to become the embedded mechanism which behaves as the ‘cognitive and intelligent phenomenon’ (de Kerchove, Derrick 2001:21).
As in virtual spaces, the accumulation in every ramification should process the information into logical expression, giving to the spatial experiences the tendency to trans-relate between one another. If taking into consideration the classifier of the classifier of the projected image, into virtual entity, rather than a concept of experience, than the classifier of the projected image would be in transit with the perception of experiences as Barzon Furion (2003) points out.
The opportunities which engages the architect into modelling the architectural image with new mapping technologies would move the human interaction to sensorial bounds, where the architect and the urban designer is in the position to make sensitive architectural changes to places . The changes would offer to the user the capacity to generate the suggested space based on the information which is particular to their situation. The generated space bounds the image of architectural objects with technology.
Is now inter-connected and articulated at every ramification, it is exchanging information, it is mechanical and computational, which generate a new set of logical forms and surfaces, which not only defines the reality as we perceive it, but it also places the reality into another realm of interaction, challenging the physical understanding of spatial possibilities to enhance the complexity of the built environment.
The structure has enabled the to access corporeal designs, as virtual entities and to translate the sensitive reaction of human body into the realm of connections and inter-articulations.
In order to build this space, the architect has to understand the complex structure of the space, which places it in a realm of self-preservation, where space gains its identity, and which forces the interaction between human and space to become more and more interactive.
The interior space of the individual, which inhabits the space choreography created by waves of information assimilated in its memory, is releasing the servicing spaces of its perception, opening the boundary of new architectural form.
The mapping of spatial movement is reinforcing the performative similarity and modulation of private and public zones, where the architects have now the possibility to enhance the needs of spatial movement.
The spatial movement is therefore postulated to the formalized development of the mapping framework, which generates multiple space relations between the interactions of the individual and its sensors, which are enclosed in built environments.
The development of built environments should impose potential in building continuity through the built and the natural environment, recognizing its compositional and spatial values from supports concealed in similarity, which are paradoxically transferring the mapping framework and developing the existing urban structure into a sensorial organism, which offers to the civic place the features in mapping the built environment.
In comparison to the natural environment, the built environment vicinity is important due to its necessary relevance in abolition of generated spaces.
The architect and the urban designer began trading these technologies in making the built environment more interactive, aspiring efficiency, releasing more security and aspiring entirely control over the life span of the building, extending the boundary of the architectural form to become the potential in developing spaces for further generations, evaluating in real time the needs of the community.