首頁  /  發(fā)現(xiàn)   /  讀書   /  正文
  • 《景觀設計學》2021年第5期

    作 者:
    陳箏(CHEN Zheng),施佳穎(SHI Jiaying),王曉博(WANG Xiaobo)等
    類 別:
    景觀
    出 版 社:
    高等教育出版社有限公司
    出版時間:
    2021年10月

從黏菌到Meta——《景觀設計學》2021年第5期“主編寄語”

From Slime Mold to Meta, by Yu Kongjian


最近的兩則新聞令我腦洞大開,一則是來自《哈佛大學??罚℉arvard Magazine)有關黏菌(Slime Mold)空間感知和決策智慧的最新研究成果[1],另一則是臉書創(chuàng)始人馬克?扎克伯格發(fā)布的將Facebook改名為Meta的消息。這兩件事情雖風馬牛不相及,卻都挑戰(zhàn)了我們對于人類空間認知、決策和設計的許多固有觀念。

黏菌是一種沒有大腦和神經系統(tǒng)的單細胞生物,在中國古代文獻中被稱作“鬼屎”,最早記載于唐代陳藏器所著的《本草拾遺》[2]。21世紀初,日本科學家發(fā)現(xiàn)它們具有超乎人類的空間感知能力—能夠迅速設計最短取食路線,走出迷宮:首先,黏菌伸展自己的菌體以覆蓋整個迷宮平面,一旦發(fā)現(xiàn)食物,就會縮回除最短路徑之外的其余部分[3]~[5]。通過這種方法,黏菌能繪制出堪比東京地鐵線路圖般復雜且最優(yōu)的聯(lián)系網絡。如果這可以理解為最原始的刺激-反應過程的話,那么《哈佛大學??穲蟮赖倪@項實驗發(fā)現(xiàn)則令人匪夷所思:黏菌居然能隔空感知遠方物體的質量,并以此決定菌體延展的方向,這表現(xiàn)出這種低等生物的空間感知、決策和設計能力,也就是一種盡量在避免無效消耗菌體物質與能量的條件下,提前設計行動路線的能力。同時,黏菌能夠在這一過程中形成異常優(yōu)美的菌體形態(tài)—從人類對于任何藝術的審美標準(諸如色彩、形態(tài)的對比與平衡關系)來講都可謂美不勝收。這讓我產生了多個聯(lián)想:

第一個聯(lián)想是前不久媒體曝光某快遞公司用了類似的刺激-反應方法,通過獎勵發(fā)現(xiàn)更短路線的快遞員,制造“內卷”,不斷壓縮投遞時間,試圖通過犧牲快遞員的個人利益實現(xiàn)公司整體收益的增長。這是一種聽起來有些殘酷的試錯機制,但這也是一種基于大數(shù)據(jù)的方法,在這方面,黏菌的決策能力一點不比人類差。

第二個聯(lián)想是黏菌的空間感知和決策過程如同中國圍棋這類空間游戲。2016年的圍棋人機大戰(zhàn)證明,人類在游戲空間的認知方面完全敗給了機器—可能有人會認為,人類在空間認知方面似乎既不如最低等的單細胞生物,也不如沒有生命的、只能識別0或1的機器。

第三個聯(lián)想,從進化論—也是認知心理學和景觀認知的基本出發(fā)點—的角度來看,人類的空間認知能力及審美與動物一樣,源于覓食或繁殖的本能。所以,正如黏菌用美麗的菌體形態(tài)來注解對生存的欲望及本能,人類通過其在空間中的運動軌跡和美的環(huán)境的設計,表達自身的生存欲望和本能。在這層意義上,人類與黏菌在本質上并無區(qū)別。

第四個聯(lián)想,基于對食物和生存欲望的空間感知,黏菌在實驗中表現(xiàn)出了物理上的高效性和平衡關系,進而讓人感受到美,這似乎為人類的空間和景觀審美找到了依據(jù),這也解釋了為什么圍棋的空間布局也同樣具有美的邏輯。

正是基于這幾點聯(lián)想,第二則新聞就變得意味深長了。Facebook提倡的元宇宙(Metaverse)是一個虛擬時空集合[6],由一系列的增強現(xiàn)實、虛擬現(xiàn)實和物聯(lián)網技術所組成,當然還要借助智慧眼鏡等工具來實現(xiàn)[7]。盡管不可回避的是,元宇宙起源于娛樂和游戲,但它將不同時空的人聯(lián)系在一起,使人類活動擺脫了時間和物理空間的約束:時空環(huán)境不再是人類活動場景的預設,而可以是某些奇幻浪漫的設計,諸如在熱帶雨林里或月球上約會、在海底或火山口聚餐、在云上開董事會,等等。作為城市空間認知的鼻祖,凱文?林奇在20世紀60年代探討了城市意象:如何增加城市的可辨識性,以幫助人們認路并形成空間認知地圖[8]。這一研究對當代城市空間的設計產生了巨大影響。而在元宇宙中,城市意象似乎失去了意義,人們也無需憑借腦中的認知地圖去尋找車站、餐廳、約會的酒吧,或造訪名勝景點,一切空間營造和景觀盡在指間以及智慧工具之中。城市空間和景觀設計的原則將面臨新的挑戰(zhàn)。

接下來的問題是,隨著元宇宙—即后宇宙、超宇宙—時代的到來,失去時間感和地域感的人類活動是否仍具有意義?失去以地域、空間和時間為載體的人類文化后,人與黏菌還有什么區(qū)別!地理學和景觀認知領域均強調空間的可辨識性、可探索性及可參與性;地理認知領域所強調的場所性和場所感取決于地域特色和認同感,以及空間的定位和方向感[9]。場所精神(Genius Loci)作為建筑與景觀設計的核心概念,取決于給定的天時及地利條件,即天地之間的立錐之地(The Given)[10]。失去了地域性和場所性,如何讓元宇宙中的人類活動具有意義?這似乎成為了一個新的設計問題。


Recently, I am inspired by two pieces of news: one is the latest findings about the spatial sense and decision-making machinery of slime molds reported by Harvard Magazine[1]; and the other is Mark Zuckerberg’s announcement that Facebook is renaming to Meta. Although the two pieces of news seem share nothing in common, they both challenge the public’s awareness about human’s ability of spatial cognition, decision, and design.

Slime mold, a single-cell organism without brain or nervous system, was described as “鬼屎” (Demon’s droppings) in ancient Chinese literature and earliest recorded in Materia Medica Supplements by Chen Zangqi in the Tang Dynasty[2]. In the early 21st Century, Japanese scientists found that slime molds have an extraordinary ability of spatial sense, even better than humans’: they can quickly work out the minimum-length solutions to food and maze solving. After changing their shapes to cover the entire maze, slime molds can retract other cytoplasm except that on the shortest path to the food.[3]~[5] In this way, slime molds can come up with optimal connections as sophisticated as the Tokyo subway network. If we take slime molds’ behavior as a primal stimulus–response process, the discovery reported in the Harvard Magazine is stunning: slime molds can perceive the mass of distant objects across space, and then decide the direction for extension. All these behaviors demonstrate this unicellular eukaryote’s ability to spatially perceive, decide, and design—in other words, slime molds are able to design an optimal route in advance without extra consumption of material or energy. Meanwhile, during the process, the colony shapes are exceptionally beautiful, in respect of any aesthetic standards of human art (e.g., the contrast and balance of colors and forms). 

This news arouses my profound reflections. First, a similar stimulus–response approach was employed in a Chinese express company which encourages expressmen to shorten delivery times by rewarding the ones who discovered shorter delivery routes. This might increase the company’s profits, but would lead to unhealthy competition and compromise expressmen’s benefits. This seemingly cruel trial-and-error technique, however, is a big data method. Accordingly, slime molds are not inferior to humans in ability of decision making.

Second, slime molds’ spatial sense and decision-making process is similar to the playing of Chinese Go. The 2016 match between AlphaGo and Lee Sedol evidenced that machines surpass humans in the cognition of game spaces. One might argue that, in terms of spatial cognition, human beings’ ability seems to be inferior to both single-cell organisms and inanimate machines that are programed with 0 and 1.

Moreover, from the perspective of Evolutionism—also the basis of Cognitive Psychology and Landscape Cognition—human’s spatial cognition and aesthetics come from their instinct for food or reproduction, as other animals. As slime molds’ behaviors for survival by changing colony shapes, humans’ desires for survival are projected in their spatial trajectories of movement and designs of beautiful environment. In this sense, there is no essential difference between human beings and slime molds.

Lastly, in previous experiment, the spatial sense of slime molds, for food and survival, also represents their physical efficiency and balance, whose beauty is further appreciated by humans. This could serve as a basis for human aesthetics on spatial layout and landscapes, which also explains the beauty logic of Go board layouts.

The reflections above expand my thoughts on the second piece of news. Facebook’s Metaverse is a virtual set of space–time[6], supported by artificial reality, virtual reality, and Internet of things, via the aid of tools such as smart glasses[7]. Developed from entertainment and game applications though, Metaverse connects people by breaking down temporal and physical constraints on human accessibility. The space–time scenarios for human activities can be extremely romantic, for example, dating in the rainforest or on the moon, dining together with an undersea or volcanic scenery, having a board meeting over the clouds, etc. Kevin Lynch, the founder of urban spatial cognition, discussed city image in the 1960s: how to enhance the imageability of cities so as to facilitate people in way-finding and form spatial cognitive maps[8]. This theory has significantly influenced contemporary urban spatial design. Unfortunately, in the Metaverse, the city image would become meaningless: stations, restaurants, bars or scenic spots would be erased from people’s cognitive maps. All spatial and landscape planning can be realized by fingers and with smart tools. Against this backdrop, urban and landscape design is facing new challenges.

In the age of Metaverse—the post-universe or super-universe—will human activities be as meaningful as before when the sense of time and place is lost? There will be no difference between human beings and slime molds if human culture that roots in place, space, and time disappear! Both Geography and Landscape Cognition value making sense, explorability, and involvement of space. The placeness and the sense of place emphasized in Geography Cognition are defined by regional characteristics and identification, as well as spatial orientation[9]. As a core concept in Architecture and Landscape Design, Genius Loci relies on THE GIVEN temporal and geographical conditions[10]. Thus, a new questions for design is that when locality and placeness no longer matter in the Metaverse, how to make human activities still meaningful.



REFERENCES


[1] Walecki, N. K. (2021). Can Slime Molds Cogitate? Harvard Magazine, 124(2). Retrieved from https://www.harvardmagazine.com/2021/11/right-now-can-slime-molds-think

[2] Chen, Z. (1983). In Z. Shang (Ed.), The Collection of Materia Medica. Anhui, China: Department of Scientific Research, Wannan Medical College.

[3] Nakagaki, T., Yamada, H., & Toth, A. (2000). Intelligence: Maze-Solving by an Amoeboid Organism. Nature, 407(6803), 470. doi:10.1038/35035159 

[4] Nakagaki, T., Yamada, H., & Toth, A. (2001). Path finding by tube morphogenesis in an amoeboid organism. Biophysical Chemistry, 92(1), 47-52. doi:10.1016/S0301-4622(01)00179-X

[5]Nakagaki, T., Lima, M., Ueda, T., Nishiura, Y., Saigusa, T., Atsushi, T., ... Showalter, K. (2007). Minimum-risk path finding by an adaptive amoebal network. Physical Review Letters, 99(6), 068104. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.99.068104

[6] Bosworth, A., & Clegg, N. (2021, September 27). Building the mataverse responsibly. Meta. Retrieved from https://about.fb.com/news/2021/09/building-the-metaverse-responsibly/

[7] TechFacebook. (2021, October 28). Connect 2021: Our vision for the metaverse. TechFacebook. Retrieved from https://tech.fb.com/connect-2021-our-vision-for-the-metaverse/

[8] Lynch, K. (1960). The Image of the City. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

[9] Relph, E. (1976). Place and Placelessness. London, England: Pion Limited.

[10] Norberg-Shulz, C. (1979). Genius Loci: Toward A Phenomenology of Architecture. New York, NY: Rizzoli.


發(fā)表評論

您好,登錄后才可以評論哦!

熱門評論

相關圖書

主站蜘蛛池模板: 久久久久亚洲精品男人的天堂| 久久久久国产午夜| 久久精品国1国二国三| 欧美深夜福利视频| 欧美日韩在线观看一区二区| 欧美一区二区三区久久综| 亚洲国产成人va在线观看| 久久永久免费人妻精品| 八区精品色欲人妻综合网| 国产剧情AV麻豆香蕉精品| 亚洲av无码国产综合专区| 久久天天躁狠狠躁夜夜2020一| 波多野结衣导航| 亚洲精品NV久久久久久久久久| 韩国福利影视一区二区三区| 亚洲午夜国产精品无码| 亚洲第一区精品日韩在线播放| 骚虎影院在线观看| 欧美色视频在线| 2019中文字幕在线电影免费| 欧美特黄特色aaa大片免费看| 国产精品二区高清在线| 99精品全国免费观看视频| 香蕉一区二区三区观| 男人一进一出桶女人视频| 亚洲人成在线观看| 日本福利视频导航| 又粗又硬又黄又爽的免费视频| 99在线观看视频免费精品9| а√最新版地址在线天堂| 久久99精品国产99久久6男男| 亚洲女初尝黑人巨高清| 男女一进一出猛进式抽搐视频| 国产日韩精品欧美一区喷水| 欧美国产日韩a在线视频| 午夜性伦鲁啊鲁免费视频| 日本全彩翼漫画全彩无遮挡| a级毛片高清免费视频| 亚洲韩国欧美一区二区三区| 最近中文字幕在线的mv视频| 91精品天美精东蜜桃传媒入口|