Outreach Testing of Ancient Astronomy

This work is an outreach approach to an ubiquitous recent problem in secondary-school education: how to face back the decreasing interest in natural sciences shown by students under ‘pressure’ of convenient resources in digital devices/applications. The approach rests on two features. First, empowering of teen-age students to understand regular natural events around, as very few educated people they meet could do. Secondly, an understanding that rests on personal capability to test and verify experimental results from the oldest science, astronomy, with simple instruments as used from antiquity down to the Renaissance (a capability restricted to just solar and lunar motions). Because lengths in astronomy and daily life are so disparate, astronomy basically involved observing and registering values of angles (along with times), measurements being of two types, of angles on the ground and of angles in space, from the ground. First, the gnomon, a simple vertical stick introduced in Babylonia and Egypt, and then in Greece, is used to understand solar motion. The gnomon shadow turns around during any given day, varying in length and thus angle between solar ray and vertical as it turns, going through a minimum (noon time, at a meridian direction) while sweeping some angular range from sunrise to sunset. Further, the shadow minimum length varies through the year, with times when shortest and sun closest to vertical, at summer solstice, and times when longest, at winter solstice six months later. The extreme directions at sunset and sunrise correspond to the solstices, swept angular range greatest at summer, over 180 degrees, and the opposite at winter, with less daytime hours; in between, spring and fall equinoxes occur, marked by collinear shadow directions at sunrise and sunset. The gnomon allows students to determine, in addition to latitude (about 40.4° North at Madrid, say), the inclination of earth equator to plane of its orbit around the sun (ecliptic), this fundamental quantity being given by half the difference between solar distances to vertical at winter and summer solstices, with value about 23.5°. Day and year periods greatly differing by about 2 ½ orders of magnitude, 1 day against 365 days, helps students to correctly visualize and interpret the experimental measurements. Since the gnomon serves to observe at night the moon shadow too, students can also determine the inclination of the lunar orbital plane, as about 5 degrees away from the ecliptic, thus explaining why eclipses are infrequent. Independently, earth taking longer between spring and fall equinoxes than from fall to spring (the solar anomaly), as again verified by the students, was explained in ancient Greek science, which posited orbits universally as circles or their combination, by introducing the eccentric circle, with earth placed some distance away from the orbital centre when considering the relative motion of the sun, which would be closer to the earth in winter. In a sense, this can be seen as hint and approximation of the elliptic orbit proposed by Kepler many centuries later.

El tiempo como sustancia de la forma : una aproximación al Museo de Arte Romano de Mérida desde los presupuestos del vitalismo

El modelo dominante durante la Era Moderna asume la presencia del hombre como sujeto dentro del gran engranaje mecánico del Cosmos. Asimismo, recoge una idea acerca del ser natural dentro de la tradición ontológica iniciada por el eleatismo presocrático que concibe a éste como lo inmutable y estático frente al cambio y al movimiento, los cuales se constituyen como meras apariencias. Durante el periodo anterior a la aparición de los grandes filósofos griegos se produce una transformación en donde, de la inicial cosmología vinculada a un tiempo primordial, se pasará a una visión del Universo como ente indestructible, atemporal, inmutable, perfecto, geométrico y espacial. Si en Demócrito se admite un universo sometido al azar y a la necesidad, en Platón el Universo sólo atiende a la necesidad. Este modelo ontológico se pone en entredicho cuando el hombre ya no es concebido como pieza de un sistema más amplio, sino como centro radical del pensamiento. La condición radical del hombre es entonces su propia vida, siendo éste el concepto troncal del denominado vitalismo cuyo más influyente representante en España es José Ortega y Gasset. El estatismo del ser –del hombre- pierde sentido; en palabras del propio Ortega, “no es un ser sino un estar siendo” lo que caracteriza a la vida humana. La razón cartesiana es ahora la razón vital y su objeto de estudio no es la naturaleza sino el propio devenir, es decir, el tiempo, la historia. Este planteamiento es fundamental para comprender el edificio que es objeto de este estudio, el Museo de Arte Romano de Mérida (1980-1985) de Rafael Moneo. Por ello el concepto de tiempo es utilizado como marco y estructura de la presente tesis, a sabiendas del notorio y muy significativo papel que este edificio desempeñó en la carrera de su autor y en el panorama nacional e internacional de la arquitectura y de la museología. Este proyecto nos permite acercarnos al pensamiento de su autor a través de un edificio que, aun habiendo sido ampliamente reconocido, no cuenta con un estudio suficientemente exhaustivo que recoja la amplitud y riqueza que encierra. Esta tesis no es un compendio de lo que ya se ha investigado sobre Mérida; es una aproximación global e interpretativa cuyo sentido sólo puede concebirse al vislumbrar la estructura completa de la misma en sintonía con el "lógos" vital, histórico y narrativo que el proyecto encierra. Se revisará la concepción histórica según la cual, la configuración espacial de la forma habría tenido primacía respecto a su configuración temporal, al remitir esta última a una condición espacializada y circunstancial. La componente vicaria de la circunstancia será elevada por Ortega a la categoría de esencial, visualizando así una paradoja cuya reformulación nos lleva a la concepción de un tiempo sustancial. El diccionario de la RAE, en su tercera acepción, define la sustancia como “aquello que permanece en algo que cambia”, lo cual nos remite al pensamiento antiguo. Se mostrará que lo que permanece no necesariamente implica una concepción estática y eleática de la forma, que la arquitectura esencial no es unívocamente la arquitectura atemporal del platonismo y que cabe concebir la "firmitas" desde la atención a la "durée" bergsoniana. Al asociar tradicionalmente la sustancia con el referido estatismo, se margina al tiempo y a la duración a lo no sustancial; por ello, se tratará de aproximar los términos de tiempo y sustancia para definir la forma. Ello conllevará al estudio de las notables patologías derivadas de la asunción de un tiempo cronológico en nuestra contemporaneidad frente a las cuales, las intuiciones contenidas en Mérida, se alinearán con la actual actitud revisionista en el ámbito del pensamiento filosófico y científico. En Mérida, la memoria recogerá los aspectos de la conciencia así como los aspectos vinculados a la experiencia íntima y colectiva como soporte para la consecución de un discurso. La dualidad entre intuición e inteligencia será recogida por Moneo con idea de trascender su incomunicabilidad, mediante una operación que consistirá en la reivindicación de una memoria irreductible, cuya morada estaría incardinada en el propio tiempo de la duración y de la vida y no en la espacialidad coextensiva del presente y de la acción funcional sobre la materia. Moneo asumirá el papel de la memoria como condición central de una forma que se encarnará al concebirse como un teatro. En la respuesta a la contradicción entre el hecho físico y el efecto psíquico de la experiencia humana residirá la pertinencia de un tiempo narrativo. Será entonces el lenguaje el encargado de aportar sentido a la obra mediante el recurso fundado en la dramatización de la experiencia, es decir, a través de una conexión entre la conciencia íntima y el carácter social y colectivo intrínseco en la arquitectura. ABSTRACT TIME AS A SUBSTANCE OF FORM. AN APPROACH TO THE ROMAN ART MUSEUM OF MÉRIDA FROM THE VIEWPOINT OF VITALISM. The dominant model during the Modern Era placed man as a subject inside the great mechanism of the cosmos. It is also based in an idea about natural being within the ontological tradition initiated by the pre-Socratic Eleatism that conceives it as something immutable and static in respect with change and movement, which are considered as mere appearances. Prior to the emergence of the great Greek philosophers occurred a transformation where concepts of cosmology linked to a primordial time, changed to a view of the universe as indestructible, timeless, unchanging, perfect, geometric and spatial. If Democritus accepted a universe subjected to randomness and necessity, Plato thought that the universe only worked by necessity. This ontological model is called into question when man is not conceived as a piece of a broader system, but as a radical center of thinking. The radical condition of man then is his own life. This is the core concept of so-called Vitalism, whose most influential representative in Spain was José Ortega y Gasset. The stillness of being – of man - loses its meaning; in the words of Ortega, “it is not being but being in progress” that characterizes human life. The Cartesian reason is now the vital reason and its subject of study is no longer nature but its own evolution, in other words, time and history. This approach is fundamental to understand the building which is the subject of this study, the Museum of Roman Art in Mérida (1980-1985) by Rafael Moneo. The concept of time is used as a framework and structure of this thesis, demonstrating the notorious and very significant role this building has implied in the career of its author and in the national and international panorama of architecture and museology. This project allow us to approach the thought of its author through a building that, even whilst widely recognized, does not yet have a sufficiently comprehensive study covering its breadth and richness. This thesis is not a compendium of what already has been researched on Merida; it is a global and interpretative approach whose meaning can only be conceived as a study of its complete structure in line with the vital, historical and narrative logos the project implies. We will review the historical idea where spatial configuration of the form would have had primacy with respect to temporary configuration, because the latter refers to a spatial and circumstantial condition. The vicarious nature of the circumstance will be elevated by Ortega to the category of essential, thus showing a paradox which reformulation leads us to the conception of a substantial time. The dictionary of the Spanish Royal Academy, in its third meaning, defines substance as "that which remains in something that changes". This is a reference to ancient thought. It will be shown that what remains does not necessarily imply a static and Eleatic conception of form. It will also be shown that the essential architecture is not uniquely the timeless architecture of Platonism and that it is possible to conceive the "firmitas" parallel to the "durée" of Henri Bergson. As a result of this traditional association between substance and stillness, it marginalizes the time and the duration to the non-substantial; for this reason, we will try to approach terms of time and substance to define the shape. This will involve studying significant pathologies resulting from an assumption of chronological time in our contemporary world against which, the insights contained in Merida, will be aligned with the current revisionist attitude in the fields of philosophical and scientific thought. In Merida, memory includes aspects of consciousness as well as aspects linked to the intimate and collective experience as a foundation for the achievement of discourse. The duality between intuition and intelligence is put forward by Moneo with the idea of transcending its lack of communication, by means of a resource consisting of the vindication of an irreducible memory, whose home would be embodied in the time of duration and life and not in the coextensive spatiality of the present and in the functional action on the matter. Moneo demonstrates the role of memory as a central condition of form as a theatre. In response to the contradiction between the physical fact and the psychological effect of human experience lies the relevance of narrative time. Language then assumes the responsibility of giving meaning to the work through the dramatization of experience, i.e., through a connection between the intimate consciousness and the intrinsic social and collective character of architecture.