Explorations in Classical Magnetism and Contemporary Art Ambient Magnetic Dipoles: Amplified Mapping of Dipole Moments Through Magnetoresistance

Sensors, Analog Differentiation Techniques and Ferromagnetic Fluids and Experiments in Painting with Magnetism
Lewis Z. Liu

presented to the Department of Visual & Environmental Studies and the Department of Physics in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a Bachelor of Arts joint degree with Honors at Harvard University on 5 May, 2008 received summa thesis standing and Highest Honors for present work on 6 June, 2008 revised 15 December, 2008

Abstract

A photograph of a magnetic sensor circuit superimposed on top of Experiments in Remainders 1(2007) Both physics and the visual arts can be said to generate ways of looking at the universe. Traditional painting, photography, and video use the physical world, as understood and represented through visible light (400-750 nm electromagnetic radiation) as a basis for artcreation. This visual investigation is then mapped onto visible physical objects, such as oil on canvas, film, or silver gelatin print, through the operation of the painter or camera. At the same time physics theories and experiments allows us to understand the fundamental, mostly invisible, structures that govern the world we live in. Just as light permeates our world, so do magnetic fields as created by our planet, by our technology, and even by our bodies. This project endeavors to shift the focus of the physical world seen through visible light to the unseen physical world of magnetic fields with two distinct installations: the first, titled Experiments in Painting with Magnetism, involves exploring painting and mark-making using controlled magnetic fields and a newly developed magnetic-spray technique. The second, titled Ambient Magnetic Dipoles: Amplified Mapping of Dipole Moments Through Magnetoresistance Sensors, Analog Differentiation Techniques and Ferromagnetic Fluids is an active joint laboratory/studio/gallery project that dynamically maps this magnetic world, using magnetoresistance sensors, analog differentiation techniques and magnetic coils, onto an artificially constructed magnetic field. These artificially generated fields are then made visible through the exploitation of ferromagnetic fluids. Thus, by exploring a previously unseen part of the world described so far only by physics equations and experimental devices, these two projects integrate the aesthetic experience of an art gallery with the experimental investigations of a physics laboratory.

Liu 2

Preface
This paper is one of three parts of my senior thesis. Because of the intricate nature and of the interdisciplinary nature of my overall project, I hope that the following chapters provide an adequate framework both artistic and scientific for Experiments Painting with Magnetism and Ambient Magnetic Dipoles: Amplified Mapping of Dipole Moments Through Magnetoresistance Sensors, Analog Differentiation Techniques and Ferromagnetic Fluids. While most of this paper should be accessible to the general reader, Chapters V and VI outline some mathematical and experimental techniques that are intended for the technical reader. The formal gallery designations for my two installation projects are as follows: Ambient Magnetic Dipoles: Amplified Mapping of Dipole Moments Through Magnetoresistance Sensors, Analog Differentiation Techniques and Ferromagnetic Fluids. Ferromagnetic Fluid, magnetoresistance sensors, 60 gallon liquid tank, electromagnets, wires, instrumentation amplifiers, resistors, capacitors, 555 oscillators, tripods, chalkboard, laboratory notebook, Tenma 30V current supplies, and other laboratory equipment, approx 10 x 10 m, 2008. (FIGURE G.1) Experiments Painting with Magnetism: (FIGURE G.2) 1. Dipole Landscape, acrylic, rust, iron on canvas, 2008 (FIGURE G.3) 2. Quadrupole Portrait, acrylic, rust, iron on canvas, 2008 (FIGURE G.4) 3. Two Ways to Make a Portrait of a Dipole Field, acrylic, rust, iron on canvas, electromagnet, Hall effect probes, INA 128 instrumentation amplifiers, LEDs, and other electronic circuitry on canvases, and strings and pulleys, 2008 (FIGURE G.5) 4. Experiments with Remainders, 1-4, four paintings, mixed media, 2007-2008 (FIGURE G.6) 5. Studies of Dipole Interactions: Attraction, Quadrupole, Superposition, and Repulsion, acrylic on canvas, acrylic, rust and iron on four canvases, 2008 (FIGURE G.7) 6. Rust Composition with Magnetic Fields, rust, varnish on plastic, 2007 (FIGURE G.8) 7. (New paintings will be produced in the Sert Gallery throughout the duration of the thesis exhibition.) (FIGURE G.9) I would first like to acknowledge my primary thesis adviser Professor Stephen Prina in the Visual and Environmental Studies Department at Harvard for three years of support, clarity, advice, and invaluable knowledge. I am also extremely grateful for Jim MacArthur, Nicholas Guise and the Gabrielse Lab (at both Harvard and ATRAP/CERN) for all the physics and electronics insight provided and Professor Annette Lemieux for guidance regarding my paintings and the rest of the Physics and Visual and Environmental Studies Department that made this project possible. I would also like to thank Nasser Zakariya and Professors Peter Galison and Eric Heller for historical and conceptual inspiration Much gratitude to my parents, Hengzhong Liu and Ling Lu, my aunt, LiangXiu Lu and brother Samuel Z. Liu for supporting me throughout my four years at Harvard, and my roommate Davis Buck Farmer for all the insight, patience, and dedication as a friend and college roommate. I would also like to acknowledge Joshua Haas, Natalie Bau, Mallory Hellman, Daniel Gordon, Katherine Colaneri, Momin Malik, Rachel Bergmann, Victoria Clark, Gabriella Tantillo, Drew Beattie, and Resident Dean Catherie Shapiro. And finally, I would like to thank Jenny Dove Wanger for much inspiration in the most unexpected ways.

Liu 3

Table of Contents

Abstract Preface Gallery Chapter I: Introduction Chapter II: Art and Literature Review Chapter III: Experiments in Painting and Magnetism Chapter IV: Ambient Magnetic Dipoles: Amplified Mapping of

2 3 5 21 24 37 42

Dipole Moments Through Magnetoresistance Sensors, Analog Differentiation Techniques and Ferromagnetic Fluids

(Chapter V: Technical Interlude, Approximating Dipole Sources Using a Magnetic-Potential Based Algorithm) (Chapter VI: Technical Interlude, Experimental Techniques for Ambient Magnetic Dipoles) Chapter VII: Conclusion

45 51 59

Liu 4

Gallery

FIGURE G.0 Linden Street Laboratory/Studio, prior to move to exhibition space, 9/2007-4/2008

Liu 5

FIGURE G.1a Ambient Magnetic Dipoles, Carpenter Center, main gallery, 2008

FIGURE G.1b Ambient Magnetic Dipoles, Carpenter Center, main gallery, 2008

Liu 6

FIGURE G.1c Ambient Magnetic Dipoles, magnetoresistance sensor matrix

FIGURE G.1d Ambient Magnetic Dipoles, viewers exploring the magnetic space

Liu 7

FIGURE G.1e Ambient Magnetic Dipoles, central circuit that amplifies dipole signatures

FIGURE G.1f Ambient Magnetic Dipoles, oscilloscope used to measure precise high frequency electric signals
Liu 8

FIGURE G.1g Ambient Magnetic Dipoles, view of tank and ferromagnetic fluid, low current

FIGURE G.1h Ambient Magnetic Dipoles, view of tank and ferromagnetic fluid, high current

Liu 9

FIGURE G.1i Ambient Magnetic Dipole, Linden Street Laboratory/ Studio, desk for Ambient Magnetic Dipoles (computer model running, lab book, voltage supplies to test prototype circuits, ferromagnetic fluid tests, 4/2008

FIGURE G.1j Ambient Magnetic Dipoles, Linden Street Laboratory/Studio, testing ferromagnetic fluid

Liu 10

FIGURE G.1k Ambient Magnetic Dipoles, sensor circuits to be placed on tripods

FIGURE G.1l Ambient Magnetic Dipoles, wiring the sensor matrix

Liu 11

FIGURE P.1dm Ambient Magnetic Dipole, adding ferromagnetic fluid

FIGURE G.1n Ambient Magnetic Dipoles, maintaining the tank during exhibition time

Liu 12

FIGURE G.2 Carpenter Center, Sert Gallery

FIGURE G.2 Carpenter Center, Sert Gallery, Studies of Dipole Interactions

Liu 13

FIGURE G.3a Dipole Landscape, acrylic, iron, and rust on canvas, 152 x 91 cm, 2008

FIGURE G.3b Dipole Landscape, detail

Liu 14

FIGURE G.4 Quadrupole Portrait, acrylic, iron, and rust on canvas, 102 x 76 cm, 2008

Liu 15

FIGURE G.5 Two Ways to Make a Portrait of a Dipole Field, acrylic, iron, and rust on canvas; Hall Effect probe, resistors, LEDs, wires, and electric components on breadboard on canvas; pulleys and string, dimensions variable, 2008

Liu 16

FIGURE G.6a Experiments with Remainders 1,detail, acrylic, iron, and rust on canvas, 51x46cm, 2008

FIGURE G.5b Experiments with Remainders 2, acrylic, iron, rust, paintbrush and mixed media on canvas 46x46cm, 2008

Liu 17

FIGURE G.5c Experiments with Remainders 3, acrylic, iron, rust, ferromagnetic fluid and mixed media on unwanted painting, 51x46cm, 2008

FIGURE G.5d Experiments with Remainders 4, acrylic, iron, rust on unwanted painting, 46x51cm, 2008

Liu 18

FIGURE G.7 Studies of Dipole Interactions: Attraction, Quadrupole, Superposition, and Repulsion, acrylic on canvas, acrylic, rust and iron on four canvases (28 x 36 cm), 2008

Liu 19

FIGURE G.8 Rust Composition with Magnetic Fields, rust, varnish on plastic, 38x25 cm, 2007

FIGURE G.9 Space to produce and experiment with new paintings in the duration of the exhibition in the Carpenter Center Sert Gallery, 2008

Liu 20

Chapter I: Introduction
The electric fish Eigenmannia uses slight variations of electric fields around its body to navigate and locate objects. By generating a continuous set of periodic electric pulses from its tail, this fish uses sensors along the length of its body to detect electrical fluctuations caused by nearby objects in relation to its own electric pulses to navigate and even communicate. 1 Aside from the many scientific curiosities biological, physical and chemical that arises from this animal, it is also very interesting to realize that Eigenmannia can see the physical world not only through the lens of light but also through electric fields. The two works Ambient Magnetic Dipoles: Amplified Mapping of Dipole Moments Through Magnetoresistance Sensors, Analog Differentiation Techniques and Ferromagnetic Fluids and Experiments in Painting with Magnetism can be placed in two distinct though intimately linked artistic and scientific frameworks. The first framework rests on the shift from the visual to the magnetic as an artistic basis of operation; the second on the integration of the physics laboratory space with the studio and gallery context. Just as Eigenmannia understands the world through variations in the electric field, Ambient Magnetic Dipoles and Experiments in Painting with Magnetism probes the physical world of magnetic fields through the joint efforts of art and science. In this written portion of my undergraduate thesis, I hope to frame Ambient Magnetic Dipoles and Experiments in Painting with Magnetism in the context of previous art-physics works (especially those dealing with magnetism) and in the context of a long-going discourse about the visual image and science (Chapter II). Next I wish to provide an outline of the process and techniques used to producing these art projects (Chapters III-VI) both artistic and technical, and finally conclude (Chapter VII) by exploring some of the implications and reflections in relation to my two projects regarding art-science intersection. Ambient Magnetic Dipoles is an installation/laboratory work that detects the everchanging magnetic fields of the gallery space, and by using various experimental techniques, exhibits this dynamically changing field in a tank of ferrofluid. Moreover, this work is an attempt to infuse the conventions and procedures of the physics laboratory into the art studio and gallery space. The second project, Experiments in Painting with Magnetism, has been an ongoing project since 2006 of developing, improving, and experimenting with various painting techniques to map out magnetic fields on canvas. Magnetism is an invisible force that permeates through the entire universe, and humanity has harnessed its physical properties to shape much the modern world; electric motors, generators, speakers, hard drives, MRIs all rely heavily on magnetism to operate, while the ancient sailors used compasses to navigate with our planets magnetic field. At the same time, physicists today use magnetic fields to control beams of protons in supercolliders or to trap small bits of volatile matter in small confined spaces. Much of my inspiration for Ambient Magnetic Dipoles and Experiments in Painting with Magnetism came from working at Professor Gerald Gabrielses Lab at both the Harvard Physics Department and CERN in

Hefligenberg, Walter Electrolocation of Objects in the Electric Fish Eigenmannia (Rhamphichthyidae, Gymnotoidei) Journal of comparative physiology. Vol 87 (1973): 137-164
1

Liu 21

Switzerland where we used highly controlled magnetic and electric fields to trap extremely cold antimatter 2 or single protons 3 (FIGURE I.1).

FIGURE I.1 The Yaffe-Penning Trap uses magnetic and electric fields to trap antihydrogen at the ATRAP Collaboration at CERN. Briefly speaking, the magnetic field is a mathematical construct used to describe the force created by moving charged particles in space. At every point in space, the field has a magnitude and direction. Formally, this is called a vector field and can be best imagined by a field of little arrows. The longer the arrow, the stronger the field is at that point in space (FIGURE I.2). One way of thinking about this is to imagine moving a compass in the presence of a magnetic field. The north end of the compass needle will align itself in the direction of the field, and the stronger the field, the faster the needle will align. 4 The compass needle can be approximated by a magnetic dipole, which is the basic magnetic building block of much of my pieces in this thesis. A magnetic dipoles field is the magnetic field generated by two poles (a north and south). A household magnet is a good example of a magnetic dipole. FIGURE I.2 shows the magnetic field surrounding a magnetic dipole, notice that all the arrows eventually point back to where they started. This leads to a very important property of magnetic fields: that all magnetic fields are said to be mathematically divergenceless. This means that if you start drawing a line at any point in the vector field,
Antimatter is where the anti-protons are negatively charged and the anti-electrons (positrons) are positively charged, hence the name antimatter because the charges are flipped. Should matter and antimatter touch, they would annihilate each other and produce pure energy. 3 Gabrielse, Gerald; Larochelle, Phillip; Le Sage, David; et al., "First Antihydrogen Production within a Penning-Ioffe Trap." Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 113001 (2008). 4 Liu, Lewis Z. Magnetism and Painting. Harvard College Tuesday Magazine. Vol. 4 Issue 1 (2006): 14.
2

Liu 22

following the direction in which the arrows are pointing, the line will always loop back on itself.

FIGURE I.2 Magnetic field (a vector field) of magnetic dipole or bar magnet 5 As a painter, I have learned to manipulate and represent spaces with paint on canvas; as a physicist student, I have learned to transcribe space with mathematical models by using both paradigms to explore this facet of nature, I have come to realize the profoundly intricate aesthetic of magnetic fields. For example, the divergenceless field of magnetism engenders a unique beauty the existence of something that always traces back on itself no matter how complex it becomes speaks to both a deep physical question (the existence of no magnetic monopoles in the universe 6) and also to the creation of a beautiful space in painting or sculpture that curls back into itself. But yet, despite all these complex and intricate structures of the magnetic field, as scientists, we are able to manipulate it so well as to trap and monitor a single electron or proton in a tiny capsule using magnetic properties of the particle 7. It is this seeming disparity that marks the line of science and art, studio and lab, physicist and painter the curious and complex natural structures next to carefully crafted realities.

Schindling, Eva, Dipole Spin System Simulation, EVSC, http://www.evsc.net/v6/htm/dipole.htm A magnetic monopole would contradict the statement that magnetic fields are divergenceless 7 D. Hanneke, S. Fogwell and G. Gabrielse, "New Measurement of the Electron Magnetic Moment and the Fine Structure Constant." Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 120801 (2008).
5 6

Liu 23

Chapter II. Art and Literature Review

The idea of combining physics and art is not new. The late MIT engineering professor Harold Edgertons photography captured previously unseen physical phenomena that captivated many viewers both scientists and artists. 8 Currently, Harvard physical chemistry professor Eric Heller has exhibited and published many prints of computerrendered representations of quantum electron flow and other forms of wave mechanics 9. Trained artists have also attempted to introduce physics into their art as well. Naum Gabos 1920 Kinetic Sculpture has been interpreted as a response to Einsteins famous energy-mass equation, E = mc2. 10 In 1969 conceptual artist Robert Barry installed hidden radio wave generators as an installation piece. 11 The currently practicing Japanese artist Sachiko Kodama uses ferrofluids (the same type of liquid I use in Ambient Magnetic Dipoles) to produce beautiful magnetic liquid sculptures. 12 At the same time my work speaks closely to magnetic painting/installations by artists Claire Watkins and Eva Schindling. In popular writing, surgeon and writer Leonard Shlain has documented, though incompletely and problematically, the parallels between physics and art throughout Western History in his book Art and Physics: Parallel Visions in Space, Time & Light.13 In this chapter, I will review the important accomplishments these projects have achieved while also pointing out the incompleteness of the previous attempts to integrate art and physics. Perhaps the most popular scientist-artist is Harold Edgerton. Edgerton was a trained engineer from MIT who developed a method of fast-shutter photography to assist in visualizing and documenting some of his experiments; some exposure times of his photography were less than a tenth of a millisecond. He realized that he could use these techniques to push the boundary of conventional photography. Some famous photographs include a bullet ripping through an apple or flame (FIGURE II.1) or a splash of water frozen in time. 14 His photographs have an uncanny stillness in a world whose events happen too quickly for humans to see. In this sense, Edgerton has successfully showed the viewer a reality that was previously inaccessible without the use of contemporary scientific equipment. As we all marvel with silence at the patterned trail of a bullet flying through a flame, we realize how alien this world is to ours. Although Edgerton has made the viewer acutely aware of another world, his photographs remove the viewer from time. We see the beauty of the instant but science and physics are dynamic; to ignore the time dimension is to ignore one of the very cornerstones of the universe. Science is about repeatability that the same theory will predict the same results every time. Edgerton covers a previously unseen beauty, but presented in its current form as singular photographs, his images fail to reveal to the viewer the hidden structure behind it.

8 Victoria and Albert Museum, Exploring Photography: Harold Edgerton, Victoria and Albert Museum, http://www.vam.ac.uk/vastatic/microsites/photography/photographerframe.php?photographerid=ph019 9 Heller, Eric, Eric Heller Gallery, Eric Heller Gallery, http://www.ericjhellergallery.com/ 10 Shlain, Leonard. Art & Physics: Parallel Visions in Space, Time & Light. Perennial, New York, (1993): 368. 11 Godfrey, Tony. Conceptual Art. Paidon, London, (2001): 201. 12 http://www.tokyoartbeat.com/event/2008/4EF8.en 13 Shlain, Leonard. Art & Physics: Parallel Visions in Space, Time & Light. Perennial, New York, (1993) 14 Victoria and Albert Museum, Exploring Photography: Harold Edgerton, Victoria and Albert Museum, http://www.vam.ac.uk/vastatic/microsites/photography/photographerframe.php?photographerid=ph019

Liu 24

FIGURE II.1 -- Edgerton, Harold, Schliever photograph of a .22 calibre bullet above a flame, 1975 C-type print, 26. X 19 cm 15 One of the most successful digital-physics artists who explicitly uses cutting-edge quantum physics in his artwork today is Harvard physical chemistry professor Eric Heller, a researcher of quantum electron flow and nonlinear wave mechanics. His prints have graced the covers of many top science journals including Nature. 16 Heller has also exhibited at SIGGRAPH, an art gallery dedicated to demonstrat[ing] how artists can excite the senses using technology. 17 The most important lesson that we can learn from Hellers work is his introduction of modern physics experiments (including even his own research) into his artwork: The images I produce always relate to concurrent research. Since September 2004, I have been investigating freak or rogue waves in the ocean. The Rogue image series arises from the complex branching patterns of energy flow that result as ocean waves negotiate a sea filled with complex currents (like the Gulf Stream and the eddies that it spins off). Almost exactly the same patterns arise on a scale one hundred billion times smaller in as electron waves negotiate paths through semiconductors. Both phenomena generate branching patterns familiar from trees and erosion landscapes. The branches are the danger zones: places where rogue waves are more likely to develop. The branches result from an unexpected focusing of wave energy. These

15 Edgerton, Harold, Schliever photograph of a .22 calibre bullet above a flame, Victoria and Albert Museum, http://www.vam.ac.uk/vastatic/microsites/photography/magnify.php?imageid=im00070 16 Nature. 8 March, 2001 Issue. 17 SIGGRAPH, Home, SIGGRAPH, http://www.siggraph.org/artdesign/gallery/S04/index1.html

Liu 25

images, at the same time abstract and literal, convey some of the mechanisms, the complexity, and the awesome danger of rogue ocean-wave formation.18 By writing computer programs that simulate and generates images of the various results of experiments in contemporary physics, Heller is able to produce beautiful visual representations of cutting-edge physics research (FIGURE II.2).19

FIGURE II.2 Heller, Eric, Transport II, 2001 20 Digital Media I can extend my criticism of Edgerton to Heller: one sees beauty in the aesthetic form of Hellers prints and, without knowing physics, perceive a slight inkling of the beautiful patterns that emerge from them, but the viewer cannot connect this aesthetic beauty to his or her sense of the structure and fabric of the universe. In a sense, these works stayed in the realm of art as visual beauty and did not go beyond that. In my two art projects, I hope to make this uneasy transition by moving towards art as exposed universal structures rather than art as pure aesthetic forms dictated by physical phenomena unknown to the viewer. I will add a caveat to Hellers work by noting that as a physicist, one may experience both understanding of physics and the aesthetic beauty of the electron trails in conjunction, but a general viewer probably would not be able to see the true physics in his works. I wish to summarize the main result from Edgerton and Hellers work. By introducing tools and current scientific research into their artwork, Edgerton and Heller
18 Heller, Eric, About the Artist, Eric Heller Gallery, http://www.ericjhellergallery.com/index.pl?page=aboutartist 19 Ibid. 20 Nature. 8 March, 2001 Issue.

Liu 26

bring the unseen reality of physics and the experimental (or theoretical) techniques of science closer to the gallery space, a major step in the goal of physics and art integration.

FIGURE II.3 Gabo, Naum, Kinetic Scupture, 1920. 21 Wire, motor, other media. This next segment, I would like to briefly review trained artists who have attempted to use physics to make art. In the twentieth century, the earliest example of such work is Finnish constructivist artist Naum Gabos 1920 Kinetic Sculpture (FIGURE II.3). According to Shlain in Art & Physics, Gabos Kinetic Sculpture is an expression of Einsteins mass-energy equivalence by using a motor-driven vibrating wire. Shlain explains: The apparent solidarity of mass in his [Gabos] Kinetic Sculpture is caused by vibrating patters of energy. Since all matter consist of widely spaced oscillating atoms each within vast reaches of empty space, this work provides an image of Einsteins equations. By creating a visual volume out or something as insubstantial as a vibrating wire, Gabo was expressing metaphorically the energy-mass equivalence. Kinetic Sculpture is a transparent, incorporeal, dynamic field of force that manifests the appearance of substance. 22
Art & Physics: Parallel Visions in Space, Time & Light. Perennial, New York(1993): 368. Ibid.

21 22

Liu 27

Although Shlains analysis of Gabos sculpture has serious flaws in its interpretation of physics regarding Kinetic Sculpture, I do not wish to downplay this sculptures importance in helping us understand the role of physics and mechanics in art. Shlains argument breaks down in his statement that visual volume, or volume in general, is equivalent to mass. This is clearly false, and one cannot equate energetic vibrations of wire with mass. 23 Furthermore, this particular interpretation of Einsteins mass-equivalence is flawed: it is not that energetic vibrations have mass, but rather the rest mass of matter can be converted into highly energetic radiation and vice versa. 24 Shlains argument is problematic, but it is a good starting point. Even if Gabo did not intend to link vibrational energy with something, Kinetic Sculpture nonetheless asks the question: what is vibrational energy equivalent to? It is not mass, but rather, I posit that a viewer, even one who is not trained in physics, should be able to see the connection between energy and waves in Gabos sculpture. An astute viewer can notice that the more energy the motor puts out, the faster the vibrations of the wire but also the shorter the distance between the nodes (the places where there is no apparent motion of the wire). Kinetic Sculpture does invoke, though perhaps unintentionally, a connection between certain structures in physics to the aesthetic experience, but not of the mass-energy relation that Shlain suggests. Ultimately, the fundamental thesis of Shlains book reads as follows, And here lies the thesis of this book that revolutionary art anticipates visionary physics lies revealed. When the vision of the revolutionary artist, rooted in the Dionysian right hemisphere, combines with precognition, art will prophesy the future conception of reality. 25 I do not wish to spend a large amount of time critiquing Shlains argument, but there are many proposals of which other factors are shown to be connected with revolutionary physics such as the German Weimar Republic for quantum mechanics as argued by Paul Forman in his controversial paper26, or maritime problems of longitude and time synchronization for relativity as argued in Peter Galisons Poncares Maps, Einsteins Clocks27. Perhaps it is not art that predicts physics, but the general intellectual milieu of that era that shapes scientific progress. In fact, one can argue today that with artists implementing so many new technologies in contemporary culture, the opposite is true: new physics discoveries lead to new technology that lead to new forms of art. In fact, Robert Barrys radio wave installation is a good example of technology and physics being appropriated by artists. Because I have written about this subject before, I will transcribe my previous commentary on Barrys work: In 1969, conceptual artist Robert Barry installed in an art gallery two hidden radio wave generators, one broadcasting an 88 MHz FM radio signal and the other a 1600 kHz AM radio signal.28 These radio waves were neither audible nor visible; the art

23 Unless one subscribes to a certain interpretation of String Theory, but discussions about String Theory are neither encouraged nor recommended in the reading of this thesis. 24 This is not entirely true, as there is such thing as relativistic mass m = m , where is the usual relativistic factor but for this particular interpretation, the vibrating wire is not creating relativistic mass in the way Shlain is interpreting it. 25 Art & Physics: Parallel Visions in Space, Time & Light. Perennial, New York. (1993): 427. 26 Forman, Paul. "Weimar culture, causality, and quantum theory: adaptation by German physicists and mathematicians to a hostile environment," Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences, Vol. 3, (1971): 1-115. 27 Galison, Peter, Einsteins Clocks, Poincares Maps: Empires of Time, W.W. Norton & Company, New York (2003). 28 Godfrey, Tony. Conceptual Art. Phaidon, London. (2001): 201.

Liu 28

gallery posted signs alerting visitors of the piece, but there were no other indications of its presence. Physicists have tried to bridge the gap between physics and art through photographs and computer models; artists have approached the task by attempting to break down the distinctions separating the disciplines. In his book Conceptual Art, Tony Godfrey explains, Post-Object Art is based on the premise that the idea of art has expanded beyond the object or visual experience to an area of serious art investigations. That is, to a philosophicallike inquiry into the nature of the concept art so that the working procedure of the artist not only encompasses the formulation of the works, but also annexes the traditional one of the critic. 29 In creating radio waves in a gallery and declaring them art, Barry attacks the idea that a work of art requires the presence of some object to be passively contemplated. Without this contemplation, the boundaries between art and non-art blur, and the physical universe itself becomes artwork. 30 I could go further in pointing out that Barry has shifted the focus of art from the visible object to the non-visible non-object; however, the work itself is still physical. This lies at the crux of his Barrys work: that although the radio waves are not objects in the traditional sense, they still exist in reality merely as a different wavelength of electromagnetic radiation that are not visible to humans. The idea of moving away from the visible, as the conceptualists have, plays into an important framework for my thesis, and I will return to this idea in Chapter VI.

FIGURE II.4 Ferrofluid under the influence of a strong dipole field Superficially, Japanese Artist Sachiko Kodamas work is quite similar to my Ambient Magnetic Dipoles, but I hope that the divergence between my project and hers becomes apparent in the upcoming chapters. Here, I intend to give a brief qualitative
29 30

Godfrey, Tony. Conceptual Art. Phaidon, London. (2001): 208. Liu, Lewis Z. Magnetism and Painting. Harvard College Tuesday Magazine. Vol. 4 Issue 1 (2006): 14-15.

Liu 29

introduction to ferrofluids and a short critique of Kodamas work in relation of the art/physics integration concept. A more technical introduction to ferrofluids is the focus of the next chapter. Ferrofluid is a type of liquid that changes shape and density in relation to its surrounding magnetic field. Developed by R. E. Rosenweig and his associates in 1964, ferrofluids have applications obviously not just in art, but have been used in electronics, mechanical engineering, defense, and other technical applications31 before Kodamas introduction of ferrofluids in the art world in 2000. 32 This kind of fluid is composed of tiny sub-micron (smaller than 10-6 meters) size magnets that are suspended in a carrier fluid such as kerosene33. When there is a magnetic field present, these tiny magnets immediately polarize and align themselves to the magnetic field; ferrofluids respond quite dramatically to magnetic fields in a very visually elegant way. For example, when one applies a magnetic field (such as that of a bar magnet) to the fluid, it quickly forms spikes that protrude in the direction of the magnets magnetic field (FIGURE II.4). By controlling the magnetic field in very specific ways, one can produce very compelling liquid forms.

FIGURE II.5 Kodama, Sachiko, Morpho Tower, 2005-2008. Ferrofluids, electromagnets, plastic 34 It is difficult to deny Kodamas innovation in introducing a new material in the world of art-making or to deny the elegance and beauty of these ferrofluid sculptures, but I think that its contextual framework and motivations do not respond to the conceptual difficulty in
Rosenweig, R. E. Ferrohydrodynamics. Cambridge University Press, Toronto (1985): 10 Kodama, Sachiko, Morpho Tower, Morpho Towers Gallery, http://morphotowers.gallery-sakamaki.net/workse.html 33 Zelazo, Roland and Melceher, James, Journal of Fluid Mechanics. Vol 39. Part (1969): 1. 34 Kodama, Sachiko, Morpho Tower, Morpho Towers Gallery, http://morphotowers.gallery-sakamaki.net/workse.html
31 32

Liu 30

integrating science and visual art. Take Kodamas most recent work, Morpho Tower 20052008, for instance (FIGURE II.5), the movements and patterns that emerge from this liquid sculpture are aesthetically captivating, but it creates a sense of mysticism around the object as opposed to a sense of erudition. Kodama presents the ferrofluid as something alive and magical in her website: A projection emerges from the surface; many spikes protrude and gather as if they are alive..... Black liquid that reacts to magnetic flux: when I saw this material for the first time, I found its strange shapes and movements very puzzling. It may have looked familiar to people used to watching morphing computer graphics and hyperrealistic virtual images that exist in only mathematical form. However, these phenomena were appearing right there in front of me in the real world. Still, a magnetic fluid can't be manipulated as freely as computer graphics. Its forms cannot contradict the physical laws of magnetism and gravity. I often marvel at how the shapes created in this magnetic fluid resemble plant or animal forms. What does this seem like?..... A water lily? What does the shape of these thorns remind you of ?..... A hedgehog? I have created various works using magnetic fluids, continuing the dialog between material and image. The gushing movement of the liquid makes it seem living, dynamic, and sometimes almost violently erotic. I am fascinated by these forms, so I am always trying to draw out the maximum allure of the material itself - its characteristics as a physical substance. Anyone can make a moving, interactive figure - a beautiful artifact which has never been seen before. I feel as if I am at the gateway to an entirely unknown continent. 35 It must be noted however that one must always take an artists statement with a grain of salt. (As well, Kodama has translated this from her original Japanese text.) That being said, there seems to be a strong correlation between the reading of Morpho Tower and Kodamas own statements. Although it is explicitly stated to the viewer what these sculptures are made from electromagnets, by hiding all the electronics and magnetic coils (this is true in all her other works as well), Kodama denies the viewer of the mechanisms that shape the ferrofluid thereby fetishizing the magnetic field and ferrofluid. The viewer only holds a distant implicit knowledge that somewhere in the bowels of the machine, there lies some machinery obeying the laws of physics producing the forms in Morpho Tower and other of Kodamas works. I wish to be very clear about where Kodamas sculptures sit in the context of art and physics. In her space, the scientist is removed, and the lone artist attempts to manipulate a magical medium. As sculptural shapes, Kodamas sculptures are beautiful and powerful, as the manipulation and introduction of a new material, these sculptures present infinite future possibilities, as an apparatus that shows an invisible force, they manipulate ferrofluids in a very technically proficient way, but as a meaningful integration between art and physics, they only confound the viewer by presenting magnetic fields as something mystical or magical. To be thorough, a counterargument to my criticism is that introducing apparent visual beauty of the forces of nature is enough to make it art; that science based art doesnt always need to be didactic. I am not necessarily saying that this is bad art. Rather, I am saying that a science based artwork that also introduces the viewer to the aesthetics and beauty of
Kodama, Sachiko, Morpho Tower, Morpho Towers Gallery, http://morphotowers.gallery-sakamaki.net/workse.html
35

Liu 31

understanding that structure has a more profound level of aesthetics than just pure visual intuition. Claire Watkins and Eva Schindling, on the other hand, produce art with physics that, to some extent, makes the viewer aware of both the how in science and also the aesthetic in art while maintaining a somewhat rigorous framework; furthermore both artists produce work that also speak quite intimately to Ambient Magnetic Dipoles and Experiments in Painting and Magnetism. I have to admit that it is not until I have mostly finished my own two projects that I have discovered Watkins and Schindling. Thus, although they do not really serve as inspiration for my work, I think it is very important for us reflect upon their pieces.

FIGURE II.6 Eva Schindling and Daniel Wislson, Deterministic Nonperiodic Flow, 2006 Magnets, wood, video, and other media 36 In Schindlings Deterministic Nonperiodic Flow, Eva Schindling and her collaborator, Daniel Wilson created an experimental apparatus installation that generated interesting discrete fluid mechanics (FIGURE II.6): A large-scale hexagonal grid of rotating units demonstrates a number of phenomena, such as pattern formation, magnetic forces and the trajectories within a dynamical system. Magnetic forces in each of the rotating arms cause a chain reaction of movement affecting neighbour units and moving across the grid. Our physical model gives participants the means of a direct and intuitive interaction with a simple dynamic system, combined with an interesting aesthetic experience. Participants are invited to interact with the sculpture by turning the units, which produces movements along unpredictable lines. A projection on the wall shows the spreading
36

Schingdling, Eva and Wilson, Daniel. Main, Deterministic Nonperiodic Flow, http://dnf.evsc.net/

Liu 32

of the movement in realtime, through the application of a motion detection filter a video feed that is taken of the installation from above. 37 Before creating this installation however, they wrote a computer program that simulated the effects and built an apparatus to see how close the simulation would be to outcomes of the actual apparatus. The somewhat parallel to the scientific method (the computer simulation, the experiment) and the acute awareness of trying to convey the aesthetic of how physical systems operate provides a stronger bridge between art and physics than the previously discussed works. In their artistic statement, Wilson and Schindling note: In a dynamical system the evolution rule states that there exists a fixed rule that describes what future states follow from the current state. Thus, an iterative process must be used to solve for the collection of future points, known as a trajectory or orbit. These trajectories, and dynamical systems in general, are highly dependent upon their initial conditions. Small initial variations may turn out to effect large variations in the long-term behavior of the system. This effect was, to some degree, evident in our models. In both the computer simulations and the physical kinetic sculpture various initial conditions produced widely varying patterns. [] In many ways we think this can be seen as a metaphor for life itself. Every human being is a complex system, both physically and mentally, and the world we find ourselves immersed in is composed of many overlapping complex systems: nature, society, the economy and so on. In each of these systems we are acutely aware of both how great an impact a small change in condition may have in the future, as well as the increasing difficulty of prediction the farther into the future we attempt to look. 38 Although Schindling and Wilson had attempted something different in their project namely the idea of bifurcation (a small change creating a drastic outcome) using only magnetism as vehicle, their method in bridging dynamic systems and art was a rigorous process that serves as an excellent guidepost to the integration of physics and art. Finally, I would like to point out Claire Watkinss work whose pieces share a distinct closeness with my own. She states her goal as: The digestive system turns food into eyelashes. I am in awe of the minutiae and delicate actions that make up everyday life. The machines I build reflect this awe and wonder. My work is intimate, curious and mesmerizing in its gestures. The translation of energy is both a functional and conceptual part of my work. The circular motion of a motor is translated into a gesture that turns peacock feathers into entomological creatures. With movement, I make machines that become creatures. I am fascinated by systems found within the body and the parallel structures located outside of it; the human brain and circuit boards, nerve systems and trees. How is the brain a computer and how is it an electrical storm? The affects of electricity are curious. Neurons fire in your head with the memories of your life. Your toast gets burned. Electricity has a visual presence in my work, traveling through motors, lights, wires microcontrollers and drawings that are circuit boards. I want to expose the invisibility of electricity, a physical reminder of its presence. 39

Schingdling, Eva and Wilson, Daniel. Main, Deterministic Nonperiodic Flow, http://dnf.evsc.net/ Schingdling, Eva and Wilson, Daniel. Motivation, Deterministic Nonperiodic Flow, http://dnf.evsc.net/ 39 Watkins, Claire. Statement, Claire Watkins, http://www.claire-watkins.com/statement.html
37 38

Liu 33

In her series of paintings/wall installations titled Parasite, Watkin used magnetic fields, pins, and iron filings to mark the space on the canvas (FIGURE II.7). I too have used the same materials (with the added addition of paint), but Watkinss focus on biological systems and the human machine has led her to a different set of aesthetics and to a different field of science. In these pieces, there are magnets controlled by electric motors hidden behind the canvas. Pins and iron filings are interspersed on a painted canvas and are controlled and moved by the moving magnets 40.

FIGURE II.7 Watkins, Claire, Parasites, 2006. Pins, iron fillings, magnets, motor, copper 41 Although many of the materials and methods of Parasites are similar to Experiments in Painting with Magnetism, the fundamental goal and readings of the two projects are ultimately different. Parasites, however, does propose the aesthetic of the magnetic field, which is one of the cornerstones of my thesis, but it does so in a different way.42 Watkins attempts to bridge electrical systems with biological systems using the artistic framework, while Experiments in Painting with Magnetism focuses closely on the understanding and manipulation of a fundamental natural structure of the universe.

Watkins, Claire. Parasites, Claire Watkins, http://www.claire-watkins.com/parasites.html Ibid. 42 It also doesnt speak as closely with Painting with the big P that my paintings endeavor to.
40 41

Liu 34

Flock of Needles, however is a beautiful piece by Watkins that, I think, quite successfully marks out the invisibility of electricity (or magnetism in this case), and creates a physical reminder of its presence (FIGURE II.8). 43 The needles defy gravity, suggesting some invisible force that holds it. The multitude of needles suggests a force permeating the architectural space, allowing the viewer to see an invisible aesthetic. In terms of marking out the invisible magnetic space, however, Flock of Needles, makes one critical mistake in its representation of physics. As explained in Chapter I, one of the very fundamental properties of magnetism is that all magnetic fields are divergenceless, and at least to this moment in our understanding of physics, makes the magnetic force unique. Flock of Needles visually demarcates a field that extends infinitely outward, though aesthetically pleasing, creates a false notion of physics. Ultimately, however, the successful creation of a physical invisible space using magnetic fields is an important accomplishment that I think my thesis speaks very directly too.

FIGURE II.8 Watkins, Claire, Flock of Needles, 2006 Needles, string, magnets, motor 44 I would like to end this chapter reflecting on an important lesson and stating perhaps one of the ultimate goals for my project: Integrating science and art is not just the simple
43 44

Watkins, Claire. Flock of Needles, Claire Watkins, http://www.claire-watkins.com/needles.html Ibid.

Liu 35

task of incorporating science into artwork. Physicists see a beauty in the understanding of how a certain structure behaves in the universe both synchronic and diachronic the interaction between electricity and magnetism, particle and wave, observation and casualty, gravity and energy, past and future, and it is not merely enough to present this structure as an aesthetic form but one must also present art as also science. Thus, I hope that my appropriation of the laboratory resolves some of these issues, and I will be discussing this point of laboratory/studio/gallery in more detail in the final chapter. Because art already deals with the aesthetic experiences in a given system, a viewer in the context of the gallery will be searching for such. Therefore, by using the a priori context of the aesthetic search in a gallery, Ambient Magnetic Dipoles and Experiments in Painting with Magnetism speak to an intuitive visual beauty of physics but also to a more cerebral cognitive beauty that comes from the pursuit and realization of understanding a certain invisible structure of the universe.

Liu 36

Chapter III: Experiments in Painting with Magnetism

In 2006, I published in a student journal an article, titled Magnetism and Painting, outlining the beginnings of my magnetic painting process: Introduction: Michael Faraday, a chemist and physicist in the 19th century, was the first person to visualize electric and magnetic fields. Although he had no mathematical education beyond trigonometry, his great insights allowed physicists who came after him to finally be able to imagine the invisible world of field lines and curves. In this collection of artwork [FIGURES III.1 and III.2], I want to capture the beauty of the everyday as seen by physicists. Specifically, these paintings explore the art of magnetic fields. Magnetic fields are integral to the everyday physics that surrounds us, from neurons to electric power plants to the nature of light itself. They permeate every inch of our bodies and every minute of our lives, but we only experience magnetic fields through their effectswe never see them directly. The idea for these paintings originated from my work in a physics laboratory diagnosing and repairing a five tesla superconducting magnet. [] From the Lab to the Studio: [] Many popular science books show the magnetic fields of horseshoe or bar magnets using iron filings Place a magnet under a sheet of paper, sprinkle iron filings over it, and the filings will align themselves with the magnets field. If the iron is spread thinly over the paper, you can see the hidden field lines emerge. In the space between the filingswhere the magnetic field is implied, not shownthis simple experiment reveals the suggestiveness of magnetic energy. Iron is ferromagnetic; this means that it retains its magnetization even after the field that polarized it is removed. This field induces a magnetic dipole moment in the iron by aligning its electrons. A magnetic dipole moment is more or less a measurement of the strength of a bar magnet. The iron filings then trace lines on the page as they seek to align their ends with those of their neighbors. The dotted curves this creates shows the magnetic field lines emerging and retreating into nothingness. Painting the Magnetic Field: I used both household magnets and electromagnets to create the paintings. An electromagnet is made by coiling wire around an iron bar and attaching it to a power source. Its strength can be controlled by adjusting the current that runs through the circuit. The placement of the magnets on the canvas was part calculation and part intuition. The initial idea was to epoxy filings to a surface, preserving the patterns they formed. I made the filings by cutting up little pieces of steel wool, and although the steel spread over the surface was visually appealing, the uniform shiny-gray color had no expressiveness. I wanted to record the positions of the filings while maintaining control over color depth and variation, so I turned to spray paint. I sprinkled the steel wool filings over a sheet of paper with magnets underneath. I then spray-painted the paper and removed the filings, leaving uncolored spaces where the filings blocked the paint. After considering the results of this process [FIGURE III.3], I decided I wanted control over the color of the marks made by the filings. The spray paint method left all the marks the color of the underlying canvas, limiting the range of possible expression in the field lines themselves. After some experimentation, I discovered that acrylic latex pigment could be diluted to a consistency at which its surface tension attracted it to the iron filings.

Liu 37

Spraying it over iron filings on canvas, it would be sucked under the filings, coloring the canvas under them but leaving the surrounding canvas mostly untouched. This technique [FIGURE III.4] allowed preservation of the steel wools positions and control over the colors of the marks, and it was this process that I used in the creation of The Dance of Zero Divergence and Boston Fantasy. Once the pigment is applied, the filings are removed, leaving a colored image of the magnetic fields on the canvas. It should be noted that this process only captures a two-dimensional slice of the field, which really extends into three dimensions. 45 The passage above provides an excellent starting point for discussing my further developments since the publication of Magnetism and Painting with the magnetic field painting technique and also provides a motivation for these paintings.

FIGURE III.1 Liu, Lewis. The Dance of Zero Divergence, 48x24, 2006. Acrylic, acrylic latex, and rust on canvas

FIGURE III.2 Liu, Lewis. Boston Fantasy, 96x40, 2006. Acrylic, acrylic latex, and rust on canvas

45

Liu, Lewis Z. 2006. Magnetism and Painting. Harvard College Tuesday Magazine. Vol. 4 Issue 1. Page 14-15.

Liu 38

FIGURE III.3 Placing the magnets behind the canvas.

FIGURE III.4 The first painting made with the magnetic/spray technique.

Liu 39

Having refined my concepts and techniques since Magnetism and Painting, I intend to discuss some of these newer ideas in the remainder of the chapter. Four main advancements since Magnetism and Painting have been made: the introduction of computer based simulations and calculations to assist with composition and magnet placement; the introduction of facture, which are visual cues that suggest to the viewer the process of painting, as to make viewers more aware of the painting process and of magnetism; the experimentation with other new methods of mark-making and materials for the magnetic field painting such as marking the canvas purely with rust or constructing electronic circuits on top of the canvas; the placement of the studio into the gallery to make viewers more aware of the laboratory process. Even in two dimensions, the magnetic field of the superposition 46 of many dipole fields can become increasingly complex as more and more dipoles are added to the plane. In order to help me compose some of these magnetic field compositions, I wrote computer programs to help me with the mathematical calculations. Essentially, the mathematics boiled down to two problems: 1. Given a configuration of dipoles on a plane, what is the overall magnetic field of the space? 2. Given a configuration of magnetic fields (or any arbitrary vector field) on a plane, what is the optimal position of a set of dipoles such that these dipoles generate a magnetic field closest resembling the given field? The first problem is extremely simple if one knows the mathematics behind superposition and the dipole equation: we first take one of the dipoles and calculate its magnetic field. Then take another dipole in the set, and by using superposition, we add the second dipoles field onto the first. We keep on doing this until we have gone through all of the dipoles in the set. The second problem, on the other hand, is far more complicated and will be treated in the next chapter in technical detail. The programs I wrote to help solve these two problems allow me to explore more complex and interesting compositions and play an interesting role in the overall concept of painting. In addition to the new mathematical and computational aspect, I have also started to introduce painting facture and new techniques and experimental techniques in the treatment of the paint or the materials on the canvas. In Green and Yellow Composition with Magnetic Fields (2006) and Experimenting with Remainders 1 (2008 FIGURE III.5), I decided to include some of the iron filings on the canvas, suggesting to the viewer how these marks may have come about. Other pieces such as Rust Composition with Magnetic Fields (2007) was not even painted with paint, but with the rust from the iron fillings after being exposed to water. As a painter, I have been exploring the space this new way of mark making can create experimenting with different types of sprays or processes. However, as a conceptual thinker, I am aware of the pitfalls of this type of painting. By maintaining a mystical aura around the magnetic fields, I admit to sometimes running into the same problems Kodama or Watkins ran into. In an attempt to address this issue, Two Ways to Make a Portrait of a Dipole Field (2008) is a full-scale painting that retains its original electromagnet to give an investigative viewer clues to the painting process by introducing electronic circuitry that also maps out the magnetic field. Overall, in this type of magnetic painting, it is not the paintbrush that is the facture of the work but rather the iron and magnets that form the spaces and shapes on the canvas. Finally and perhaps most importantly, Experiments Painting with Magnetism will be
Superposition is a mathematical principle that states we can add any number of magnetic fields together, and its solution can be characterized by the sum of each of the fields components.
46

Liu 40

installed as a painting and studio installation where I would be constantly producing new paintings in the Sert Gallery throughout the length of the exhibition in order to expose the investigations and experimentations of the painting process.

FIGURE III.5 Liu, Lewis, Detail from Experimenting with Remainders 1, 24x18, 2007 Rust, acrylic, and iron on canvas

Liu 41

Chapter IV: Ambient Magnetic Dipoles

Ambient Magnetic Dipoles: Amplified Mapping of Dipole Moments Through Analog Differentiation Techniques and Ferromagnetic Fluids is an installation that picks up and calculates ambient magnetic dipole signatures in a two dimensional slice of a large gallery space and amplifies these signatures magnetically in a 60-gallon cubic tank of a ferromagnetic fluid and water suspension. By transplanting the physics laboratory the equipment, electronics, and methodology into the studio/gallery space, this work endeavors to closely integrate not just the structures of physics with a viewers visual aesthetic experience but also the practice of art with the practice of physical experimentation. I will first describe what exactly are ambient dipole signatures; second, give a non-technical overview of how this amplification process works; and finally discuss the integration of a laboratory space into the studio/gallery context. I have explained magnetic dipoles in Chapter I. It is an object that produces a field quite similar to that of a common household bar or refrigerator magnet and it is considered to be the lowest order approximation of any arbitrary magnetic field in space. Lowest order approximation is a physics term that captures the greatest amount of information with the simplest model. A non-physics example would be that the lowest order approximation of a human head when drawing is a circle. My installation attempts to pick out these dipole signatures of the space and exhibits them in the 60-gallon tank. Another analogy could be to imagine a place where the most prominent and common color there is green. Then imagine I have a camera with a filter that only picks up green. When I develop the film, I have an incomplete image of the world an image that shows only the green. But because green is the most common color in this place, I get a fairly decent idea of what this place looks like. My apparatus serves to do the same. By picking up the lowest order magnetic signature, I hope to give a viewer an approximate rendition of the magnetic field they stand in. In fact, some biophysicists approximate neuroelectric currents in the human brain with tiny magnetic dipoles. 47 When the ambient magnetic fields of the instillation space change due to people walking through, cars driving by, or thunderstorms passing through, the viewer would be able to see the changing dipole signatures in the tank. There are sixteen two-axis magnetoresistance (MR) effect probes that detect the magnitude of the magnetic field in two perpendicular directions parallel to the floor (FIGURE VI.2b). Each of the sensor circuits is mounted on a camera tripod to evoke the idea of photography or video and also the replacement of the visual from the magnetic. They are arranged in a 4 by 4 lattice with each lattice point spaced 2-3 meters apart (FIGURE VI.1). The magnetoresistance effect is a physical phenomenon that allows these probes to detect magnetic fields. Each individual sensor can measure the magnitude of the magnetic field in a specific direction. A two-axis probe contains two of these sensors that measure the field strength in two perpendicular directions. If a magnetic field is present and is also aligned in the direction of one of these sensors, the field changes the resistance of the material. Resistance describes the degree in which a material can absorb electric power. Thus, by measuring the resistance across this material, the MR sensor can output an electric

L. A. Bradshaw, A. Myers, W. O. Richards, W. Drake and J. P. Wikswo. 2005. Vector Projection of Biomagnetic Fields. Medical and Biological Engineering and Computing. Vol. 43.1. Pg 91.
47

Liu 42

signal that is proportional to how strong the magnetic field is in that given direction (FIGURE IV.1). The signals these sixteen MR probes are then processed by a special configuration of instrumentation amplifiers and solid state relays that give an approximate description of the various dipole signatures of the space. Dipole signatures only exist when there is a specific kind of variation in the magnetic fields between certain points in space. These instrumentation amplifiers are tiny electronic devices that amplify the small variation between two signals. By setting them up in a specific way, we can figure out where and how strong these dipole signatures are.
Linearity in Sensor Output
200 Sensor Output (mV) 100 0 -100 0 -200 -300 -400 -500 Current Applied to Generate Magnetic Field (A) 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 V = -183.76*I + 135.48 R2 = 0.999

FIGURE IV.1 This shows a proportional relation between the sensor output and the strength of the magnetic field applied to it. Next by implementing twelve magnetic coils controlled by a specific configuration of switches, my apparatus maps the ambient dipole signatures into the tank of ferrofluid. The tank, like the installation space, is divided into a 4 by 4 square lattice, except here, each grid line is spaced 6 inches apart, with electromagnets (or coils) positioned parallel to each grid segment to make the mathematics of the system work out. The tank is filled with a ferrofluid and water suspension. Because ferrofluid is denser the water, when all of the coils are turned off, the ferrofluid will sink to the bottom of the tank creating a layer that is about 1 cm thick. The coils are all positioned in a plane about 2 cm above the ferrofluid. This is so that the water can cool off the coils, as they generate a substantial amount of heat, and also to prevent the coils magnetizing all of the ferrofluid in the tank. As explained in Chapter II (and Chapter VI for a more technical treatment of ferrofluids), ferromagnetic fluid is a liquid that responds quite dramatically and quickly to applied magnetic fields. As the coils are turned on and off by the circuit that calculates dipole signatures, the ferrofluid in the tank will map out the dynamic magnetic field inside the tank generated by these coils, creating a visual approximation of both the generated magnetic field inside the tank thus in turn also the dipoles in the installation space. Although I have given a brief overview of the apparatus, Ambient Magnetic Dipoles is not just the objects in the installation; it is also the act of placing the physics

Liu 43

laboratory framework into the artistic studio and gallery context. I have chosen a more raw or rather a more lab-like aesthetic (the viewer can see all the wires, electric circuits, laboratory devices in the gallery); in a sense, this particular work is also a performance piece. Throughout the entire process, I have engaged the conception and construction of the apparatus in the same way one would conduct a proper scientific measurement including writing a computer program to run simulations and calculations, running through electronic circuit testing, and perhaps most importantly documenting everything in a lab notebook (quad ruled, 200 pages, archival, FIGURE IV.2). As the installation is running, daily maintenance, modification and documentation are required (like any experimental setup). In addition to the apparatus in the gallery, a lab bench is installed with the current supplies for the coils and electronics, some other experimental control devices, and daily maintenance tools (such as multimeters, soldering irons, etc.). The viewer is allowed to peruse through the lab book in addition to being able to play with the installation by bringing various objects into the sensor grid thus effectively transforming the passive viewer to an experimenter. This concludes my general, qualitative, description of the Ambient Magnetic Dipoles work. Although I have left out many technical details, I hope that this chapter has provided a short but clear documentation for my installation and performance. For a more quantitative and scientific treatment of my project, please read the next two optional technical chapters.

FIGURE IV.2 Part of the installation, viewers will be invited to flip through my lab notebook throughout the length of the exhibition.

Liu 44

(Chapter V: Technical Interlude, Approximating Dipole Sources Using a Magnetic-Potential Based Algorithm) 48
This chapter is intended to illustrate a technical component used to help compose some of my magnetic field paintings and to simulate the viability of the Ambient Magnetic Dipoles project. As mentioned in the previous chapter, calculating the magnetic field given a set of dipoles is a simple task, but the inverse is not so trivial. Maxwells equations tell us that with no external electric fields, the current distribution49, J, and magnetic field, B, are related by the following formulas50: B=J B=0 At first glance, the problem of calculating current sources from a given vector field seems trivial because we can just directly compute B for the current sources. Though it is certainly trivial to calculate the curl of a vector field with a computer, calculating dipole sources from a given magnetic field is not. One way of approximating a magnetic field in space is the multi-pole expansion technique. In three dimensions, the vector potential of one current loop at position, r, is given by: A(r)=(I 0 / 4 ) 1/(r2 + (r ) 2 2 <r , r >)1/2 dr Where we integrate around the current loop and <*,*> is the usual Euclidian inner product between two vectors. Now we can write the term inside the integral as a sum of Legendre Polynomials, Pn (x): A(r)=(I 0 /4 ) (1/ r n+1 ) (r)n Pn (cos q) dr , where n is summed from 0 to and cos q = <r , r >/|r||r| Now the n = 0 term, the magnetic monopole, cancels because the magnetic field is divergence-less, and the next lowest order term, n=1, is the dipole term: Adip(r) = (I 0 /4 ) (1/ r 2 ) r cos q dr = m r / |r|3 With the magnetic dipole moment, m I r cos q dr Thus, the magnetic field, B, at position r of a dipole located at the origin with a magnetic dipole moment, m, is given by: B(r) = 0/(4 |r|3) [ 3 <m , r/|r|> (r/|r|) m]

48 Much of this work is done in the Fall semester of 2008 in Applied Math 205 Practical Scientific Computing, much thanks to Sheyres Mandre for his insight about magnetic potentials. 49 A word on notation, a bolded variable is either a vector or a vector field, a non-bolded variable is a scalar. 50 Primary reference for Electrodynamics: Griffiths, David. Introduction to Electrodynamics. Prentice Hall. 1999.

Liu 45

Because the magnetic dipole term is the lowest order approximation of an arbitrary magnetic field and because it is the easiest to physically construct with a current generator and wire, the approximation problem is reduced to what was stated in the previous chapter: Given a configuration of magnetic fields (or any arbitrary vector field) on a plane, what is the optimal position of a set of dipoles such that these dipoles generate a magnetic field closest resembling the given field? We can see that there is no simple analytical relation that we can give between an arbitrary magnetic field and a set of dipoles. In fact, not all vector fields can be physically realized as magnetic fields (simply consider a vector field with nonzero divergence). Since the magnetic field is divergence-less, we can write the magnetic field in terms of a vector potential, A. Namely, B = A. Using an appropriate gauge, 2 A = - J = - B. Where 2 is the Laplacian. Here, if we know B, then we need to solve three separate Poissons equations to get A. In Cartesian coordinates, this becomes 2 Ax = - Jx 2 Ay = - Jy 2 Az = - Jz However, because we are ultimately interested in a two-dimensional slice, B is only a function of x and y so only the Jz component remains. This is because the two-dimensional curl of a vector field is a scalar: Thus, we only need to solve for one Poissons equation to calculate A. Namely, 2 Az = - Jz. Since now we only have to deal with a scalar field and not a vector field, for the sake of simplicity, I will call A = Az, and J = Jz. Furthermore, Since A carries the same exact information as B, we can attempt to search for dipoles in the newly calculated scalar field A instead of looking for dipole signatures in the vector field B. So how do we look for a signature of the dipole in A? The way I thought about it is to first look for the most distinctive property of a dipoles potential. Noticing that the magnetic potential of a dipole is: Adip = m r / |r|3 . In two dimensions, this becomes: Adip = |m| sin /|r|^2 . Where is the angle of deviance from the magnetic moment, m. We see that in an ideal theoretical dipole, there exists a singularity at r = 0. Due to the numerical nature of this
Liu 46

project and because the dipoles I will be working with in my artwork are physical dipoles, making calculations with singularities would be rather unpleasant and unnecessary. However, we may notice that there is massive change in the value of Adip at = /2 around r = 0. Therefore, we can search for this big change in the scalar magnetic potential by taking its gradient: let Gdip = Adip. By analyzing Adip (x, y) and Gdip, we notice that there is a hint of a dipole moment perpendicular to Gdip (r max) where rmax is where |Gdip| attains its maximum value. At first sight, this seems trivial because why not just find the location where |B| attains its maximum values and place a dipole moment there parallel to it? Well it turns that that even for a constant magnitude field, that is a vector field that has the same magnitude for all its vectors, the method of the magnetic potential still works because G is an implicit function of B that describes not just the magnitude but also its shape. Therefore, setting up an algorithm that searches for these signatures of the dipole moment in A and implementing a clever matching and subtraction protocol, we can hopefully find out where the dipole moments are in a given arbitrary vector field. In order to clearly outline the algorithm to calculate the dipole moments, I would like to define some variables for an nxm resolution system: Let B(x, y): (0,n)x(0,m)2->2 be the vector field of our current best calculated estimate with: J (x, y) B = y Bx - x By (the two-dimensional curl) A (x, y) dx dy J (x, y) / |(x-y) (x, y)|, the solution to Poissons Equation G (x, y) A Let B: (0,n)x(0,m) 2->2 be the reference vector field that we are trying to match with: J (x, y) B , the scalar two-dimensional magnetic potential A (x, y) dx dy J (x, y) / |(x-y) (x, y)| Let D(B, B): BB -> (0,1) 1 be the scalar function that describes the wellness of fit for the current solution, B, where D = 1 is a perfect solution. Let C(x, y) = A A : (0,n)x(0,m) 2->, the sum of differences of magnetic potential across the entire space between our current estimate and the actual vector field. I will define some variables later as they come up for the algorithm, but note that for simplicitys sake, it is reasonable assume that while taking about computational time, O(n) = O(m) since n and m are around the same order. If we think about what is one of the best mathematical operations to describe how similar two vectors are from each other, the inner product is the first that comes to mind. The inner product between two vectors achieves its highest value when they are parallel, while it attains its lowest if the two vectors are anti-parallel Thus, the inner product is used extensively to calculate D. 51 Namely, after magnitude normalization,
Note that there is a normalization technique I use to make sure the magnitudes of B and B match up, but that is not a critical concept here.
51

Liu 47

D a/b where a

<B(x,y) , B(x,y)> (sum from x=0 to x=n, y=0 to y=m) <B(x,y) , B(x,y)> (sum from x=0 to x=n, y=0 to y=m).

By summing over the entire space, we compare each vector of B to B. Note that our describe summation expression becomes an integral expression in a completely continuous case: D=

( <B(x,y) , B(x,y)> dx dy ) / ( <B (x,y) , B(x,y)> dx dy )

But here, because we are using numerical methods, n by m is the resolution of the system. b serves as the denominator because it is the sum of the inner product of the reference field with itself, which describes a perfect fit. At the same time, a compares our current estimate, B, with the reference field B. Thus, in the limiting case, if B = B, then D = 1, which is one of the a priori definitions we gave D. Also note that the computational cost for calculating D is O(n2). Ultimately, our problem can be posed as finding optimizing variables in two ways: max D or min

[ ]

[ C(x,y) ] (sum from x=0 to x=n, y=0 to y=m)

For the former, a vector-by-vector comparison is required, and for the latter, we must operate on every scalar point in our space. Because D has an absolute maximum value of 1 and is a definite ratio, it gives us a better intuitive understanding of how well B fits B; so we will be using D in our primary fit calculations. I do not wish to go into the tedious details of my algorithm, but will provide the essential steps in calculating the dipole positions. In very general psuedo-code, the algorithm is as follows: (1) Compute J and A (2) While (D < Some desired accuracy) { a. Compute C = A A b. Find max | C | in the space, let that position be xmax and ymax c. Until (We find a new dipole moment) { i. Find optimal magnitude constant m for a new dipole, where the new magnetic dipole moment, m is defined by m m (0, 0, C(xmax, ymax )) x (xmax, ymax 0), at r=(xmax, ymax ). Notice that the new magnetic dipole moment is perpendicular to the gradient. ii. If no optimal scaling constant exists that can increase D, find the next greatest | C |. Continue until a new dipole moment is found. iii. Once a new dipole is found, add its vector potential to A
Liu 48

d. Loop } e. Run a Cleanup function that will aggregate and average dipoles nearby the position of the newly placed dipole, r, to a single dipole using a mass-moment method. (3) Loop} There are several key concepts in the algorithm I would like to point out. In line (2.a), the subtraction of the vector potentials is crucial in decreasing computational time and is made possible by the superposition principle. By subtracting out A, we focus only on the task at hand namely only the parts of the reference field, B, that we have not yet solved. Therefore, as the algorithm goes to higher and higher iterations, the new dipoles added will be smaller and smaller corrections to the overall solution, allowing a very good general solution early on.

FIGURE V.1 A screenshot of the program depicting the B, B, and A-A Moreover, the magnitude constant, m, in lines (2.c.i) (2.c.ii) is crucial in achieving accurate solutions. In general, m decreases as D increases because the dipoles early on in the

Liu 49

iteration process should be stronger than the dipoles later on as the solution becomes more and more refined.52 The Cleanup function in line (2.e) serves as an important tool in aggregating the many clustered dipole moments in a region of space. Every time a new dipole moment is added, this function uses a formula similar that for moment of inertia and calculates a single dipole that is an average of all the other dipoles around it with respect to position, direction, and magnitude. This algorithm can run indefinitely until either a perfect solution has been reached (where D = 1), or until it reaches a desirable result set by the user. I have used this program to help me compose various paintings. It has proved to be extremely helpful in determining where to position my magnets for a specific composition. Furthermore, the mathematical analysis for this program provided inspiration and method for the Ambient Magnetic Dipoles installation. FIGURES V.1 and V.2 provide a screenshot of one of the versions of this program. The next chapter will focus on the experimental techniques used to somewhat parallel the computational techniques in the algorithm described above.

FIGURE V.2 Another screenshot of the program depicting the dipole placements

The optimal m can be found with various methods, but exploring this is a rather tedious discussion that is not extremely relevant in this chapter.
52

Liu 50

(Chapter VI: Technical Interlude, Experimental Techniques in the Analog Amplification of Ambient Magnetic Dipole Moments)
In Chapter IV, I outlined the overall setup of the Ambient Magnetic Dipoles installation; in this chapter, I will discuss some main technical details of the apparatus. Translating the program from Chapter V into a physical apparatus that quickly maps out the tiny variations of magnetic field changes in a space without a tremendous amount of resources and a powerful computer is a difficult task. Even though the algorithm is relatively fast, it still cannot calculate dipole moments in real time with a home or office computer processing chip, so I have explored and implemented analog techniques to approximate the algorithm described in Chapter V. As explained in Chapter V, I have decided to focus on only dipole moments because of their versatility in describing magnetic fields and because of the easy construction process. If we look at the algorithm, we see that the crucial concept in finding the position a magnetic dipole moment to is to search for where |A| attains a relatively high value. Here, as before, A is the scalar magnetic potential of a two-dimensional slice of the magnetic field.

FIGURE VI.1 The sensor grid setup. Notice that the sensor axes are aligned 45 to the lattice axes

Liu 51

Unfortunately, due to budgetary constraints, solving Poissons Equation to calculate A through analog or digital means would require many more amplifiers, DACs, or ADCs than I could afford. Fortunately however, J, the gradient of current distribution, gives decent enough information for the installation, and it is very straightforward to set up a series of instrumentation amplifiers to do so after figuring out the mathematics.

FIGURE VI.2a Circuit diagram for one of the sixteen sensor circuits. The sensor array is set up in a lattice of 4 by 4 sensor circuits that pick up the x-axis and y-axis fields parallel to the plane of the floor (FIGURE VI.1). Each sensor circuit is mounted on a tripod about 3-4m off the ground and is composed primarily of a Honeywell HMC1022 two-axis magnetoresistance (MR) effect probe (FIGURE VI.2a and VI.2b). The magnetoresistance effect based sensors are far more sensitive than Hall effect sensors, and can be used to detect up to an order of 10-5 gauss of magnetic field but do require much more electronic maintenance. 53 As briefly noted in Chapter IV, the magnetoresistance effect applies to certain materials (in the case of the HMC 1022 it is a Nickel-Iron compound on a
Quasdorf , Joachim, 2005. A Case Study: MR vs. Hall Effect for Position Sensing. Sensors. Nov. 1 2005. http://www.sensorsmag.com/sensors/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=314520&pageID=1&sk=&date#
53

Liu 52

silicon wafer) whereby an applied magnetic field will change its resistive characteristics. By setting up a Wheatstone Bridge to measure the resistance of this material, the bridge can output a voltage difference linear to the applied magnetic field in a specific direction. In the case of the HMC 1022, we receive signals from both the x-axis (A) and the y-axis (B).

FIGURE VI.2b One of the sensor circuits Because of the high sensitivity of the sensor, a strong magnetic field on the order of 4-10 gauss can easily upset the magnetic domain of the magnetoresistive material, which causes severe signal output degradation. To correct for this, the HMC 1022 has an internal magnetic coil for each of its axis to realign its magnetic domains. By sending a positive current on the order of 2-4A, and then a current of equal magnitude but opposite polarity, the internal coil anti-aligns and then aligns the sensors magnetic domain to a specific sensitivity. I have used a 555 timer to generate astable 12V 3s pulse every across all the sixteen sensors every 50-100 seconds and there are two 0.1 F, one for each axis, to convert the 3s pulse from voltage to current (FIGURE VI.3). There are also two Texas Instruments INA 128 instrumentation amplifiers to determine the voltage difference across the HMC 1022 Wheatstone Bridge and to amplify this signal at gain G=100. In order to calculate current distribution, J, for a two-dimensional magnetic field system, we need to calculate: J(x, y) = By/x - Bx/y In discrete coordinates, this becomes: J(x, y) = (By (x2) Bx(x1))/x (Bx (y2) Bx(y1))/y , with x x2 x1 and y y2 y1

Liu 53

Since we are in a square grid lattice, x = y, and in our electronic analog calculations, x and y terms merely become scaling constants that we can factor out; so we ignore them. FIGURE VI.4 shows the way J is computed from the amplified outputs of the sensor circuits using INA 128 instrumentation amplifiers.

FIGURE VI.3 Above, the 3s voltage pulse every 100s from the clock output. Below, the current pulse going into the SET/RESET strap.

FIGURE VI.4 The first two instrumentation amplifiers calculates B, and the second calculates J.

Liu 54

From sixteen sensor points we get a grid of a three by three array of current density values, because it requires four points to calculate one value of current density (FIGURE VI.5). Next, we calculate G = J and assign a dipole signature to the points in space with a high value of |J|. This can be done by, again, using INA 218 instrumentation amplifiers. Instead of calculating a proper vector for the gradient at this point, however, it is far more efficient to calculate the change of J across two adjacent points in the grid of current distributions. Then, if that J exceeds either a positive or negative critical value, it will turn on a diode based relay system (FIGURE VI.6a and b) that controls the magnetic coil in the tank of ferrofluid with the appropriate polarity. Using this method, nine current density values in a grid of 3 by 3 can control twelve coils (FIGURE VI.7).

FIGURE VI.5 As described, sixteen sensor circuits allow for nine values of current density.

FIGURE VI.6a Circuit for the diode switch system that controls the on/off of the coil.

Liu 55

2
-1 -2 -3

10

FIGURE VI.6b A hypothetical plot of VJ versus time. If VJ > 1, then the coil flips on with one polarity. If VJ <1, then the coil flips on with the opposite polarity.

FIGURE VI.7 The magnetic coil configuration inside the tank. The magnetic coils are wound around an iron core, controlled by a diode-relay system, and is driven by a 1A, 20V Tenma voltage supply. The fields generated by these coils are made visible through a ferrofluid water suspension inside the tank. Although the physics behind ferrofluids is fascinating an interdisciplinary study between fluid mechanics, thermodynamics and classical electrodynamics, the review and research of this liquid is beyond the scope of this paper. I will, however, point out the main physical phenomenon, called normal field instability that is ultimately responsible for the creation of the protrusions that map out the magnetic field inside the tank. When a semi-uniform magnetic field whose magnitude exceeds a critical value is applied to the ferrofluid, the fluid spontaneously creates protrusions (spike) in the direction of the field. These protrusions furthermore, have a hexagonal base if viewed from above

Liu 56

and are caused by the superposition of harmonic terms in the equations of motion. Without going into the derivation of the critical field relation, I will quote directly from Ronald Rosenweigs Ferrohydrodynamics: 54 Mc 2 = (2/0 ) (1 + 1/r0) (g Dr s)1/2 Here, Mc is the critical magnetization, r0 and s are a constant relating to the magnetic permeability of the material, g is the gravitational pull, Dr = r - r0 , the difference of density between that of ferrofluid and its surrounding medium. FIGURE VI.7 shows a plot of magnetization versus r/r0 (the ratio between ferrofluid density and the surrounding medium). Notice that the critical value for water is significantly lower for all densities of ferrofluid than air. Moreover, if we look at FIGURE VI.9, the plot for peak spacing, we realize that water also affords larger spacing by at least a factor of two as well. Thus, because water is significantly denser than air, water is used as a the ambient medium for various reasons: to decrease the effective weight of the ferrofluid, to simulate a more gravity-less environment (as the ambient magnetic fields measured are only extremely slightly effected by earths gravity), decrease critical magnetization to conserve energy for the coils, to dissipate heat generated from the coils, to prevent the ferrofluid from drying up, and finally to create larger spacing for the peaks such that viewers from farther away can observe the ferrofluid.

FIGURE VI.7 Comparison of the experimental critical magneization with theory for normal-field instability. (After Cowley and Rosenweig 1967) 55

54 55

Rosenweig, R. E. Ferrohydrodynamics. Cambridge University Press, Toronto (1985): 192 Rosenweig, R. E. Ferrohydrodynamics. Cambridge University Press, Toronto (1985): 195

Liu 57

FIGURE VI.8 Compaision of the experimental critical spacing with theory for the normal-field instability. (After Cowley and Rosenweig 1967) 56 This concludes Chapter VI, and I hope that I have made a clear outline of some of the technical points of my apparatus and how the ambient magnetic field eventually maps onto the ferrofluid. Throughout the duration of the exhibit, I intend to make modifications to the installation set-up to increase the sensitivity and amplification of the experiment.

56

Rosenweig, R. E. Ferrohydrodynamics. Cambridge University Press, Toronto (1985): 195

Liu 58

Chapter VII Conclusion

In many ways, my thesis could be seen as a response artistic, scientific, or otherwise to the changing social and intellectual climate of the modern information age. We live in the age where mechanical and digital reproduction has, to some extent, abolished representational painting and maybe even photography of its charm57. A world where, according to Victor Burgin in response to Conceptualism, art is no longer to be defined as an artisanal activity, a process of crafting fine objects in a given medium rather to be seen as a set of operations performed in a field of signifying practices, perhaps centered on a medium but not bounded by it. 58 Both Ambient Magnetic Dipoles and Experiments in Painting and Magnetism are attempts to not only merge the paradigms of art and physics 59 but also that of philosophical conceptualism and intuitive aestheticism and of crafty engineering with a rigorous set of signifying practices. By integrating the laboratory setting into the studio and gallery space, my thesis invariably evokes the idea of the Duchampian readymade 60. However, at this point, my two projects, especially Ambient Magnetic Dipoles, are not just about appropriating the laboratory equipment but attempting to transplant the entire conceptual and practical framework of the lab into an art-space. Thus, the readymade acts not only as objects the voltage supplies or magnetoresistance sensors but in a way, the whole paradigm of physics itself. But I think the pure readymade stops right here, and some scientific concepts are lost in translation. It is true that like mostly all physics work, my projects probe the invisible forces that hold our universe. Experimental physicists invent devices to measure and record these structures as I attempt to parallel it with my new painting method or the installation apparatus. Yet after this translation, both projects take a different turn from the classic readymade the transcription is not complete; neither projects engage the experiments that occupy physics researchers today my apparatus does not measure the fine structure constant to one part per quadrillion nor does the paintings attempt to map out magnetic reconnection of the sun. Moreover, at this level of appropriation, my projects do not parallel the scientific method: there is no hypothesis to test, rather an apparatus or method to measure and display magnetic fields. Where the physics paradigm stops here, another readymade in the form of art into physics is produced: I transplant back artistic practices and frameworks into the laboratory/physics space. Both Ambient Magnetic Dipoles and Experiments in Painting and Magnetism are attempts to find a way to convey the beauty of the divergenceless magnetic field and the aesthetics of how they operate in space. The act of art, in some sense, is a search and creation for a powerful aesthetic system and not necessarily the search for repeatable models of the universe (which is what physics is for).
Benjamin, Walter. The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction. 1933-35. Burgin, Victor. From the Absence of Presence, in When Attitudes Become Form (1969), ed. Charles Harrison and Paul Wood, Art in Theory, 1900-2000, An Anthology of Changing Ideas: 1070 59 There seems to be a time lag between the interaction between art and science, and in this case, physics and art. Dedicated artists now make artwork relating to physics discovered many decades ago, and one explanation is perhaps the lengthy translation from fundamental physics to readily available technology. 60 Marcel Duchamp proposed the idea of the readymade, whereby, he stipulated that anything could be considered art as long as it is in the proper context. Perhaps the most famous example is the Fountain, where he submitted a urinal to a New York art show in 1917.
57 58

Liu 59

Yet the head-on search for only the beauty of divergenceless fields skips a beat when I perform simulations and mini-experiments on the electronics where my attention is completely focused on, for example, creating a low noise linear signal from the mangetoresistance sensor Like a fractal of nested Russian Dolls, connected by incomplete conceptual-based and object-based Duchampian readymades, a packet of art is nested in a packet of physics, which in turn is again nested in art. Its a pleasure to admit that while constructing the Ambient Magnetic Dipole apparatus or coding the program for the paintings, I felt no difference from being in a laboratory than from the studio, no difference from thinking out an idea about a painting than from working out a physics equation. Ultimately, however, one must recognize that the biggest Russian Doll is still the art gallery, and that invariably my thesis is physics based art, not art based physics. This is perhaps the biggest criticism of my four-year journey at Harvard College, but the concluding problems regarding any intellectual endeavor often propositions newer and better concepts and projects to be carried out in the future. In my final reflections, I present a challenge to both myself and the reader: to create something in which science and art stand on equal footing, where its not a series of nested ideas but rather an un-collapsible quantum superposition of science and art. I am excited about this challenge. I am excited about breaking down all intellectual barriers formed by artificial frameworks or academic disciplines in search for the greatest thoughts.

Liu 60