The Spectator in the Picture

This paper considers whether pictures ever implicitly represent internal spectators of the scenes they depict, and what theoretical construal to offer of their doing so. Richard Wollheim's discussion (Painting as an Art, ch.3) is taken as the most sophisticated attempt to answer these questions. I argue that Wollheim does not provide convincing argument for his claim that some pictures implicitly represent an internal spectator with whom the viewer of the picture is to imaginatively identify. instead, I defend a view on which the external spectator simply imagines herself interacting, psychologically and otherwise, with the depicted scene. I explore some of the consequences of the two positions for pictorial aesthetics, arguing that the view I favour is at least as competent as Wollheim's at accommodating those phenomena we have any reason to think hold

Critical Reasoning and Critical Perception

The outcome of criticism is a perception. Does this mean that criticism cannot count as a rational process? For it to do so, it seems it would have to be possible for there to be an argument for a perception. Yet perceptions do not seem to be the right sort of item to serve as the conclusions of arguments. Is this appearance borne out? I examine why perceptions might not be able to play that role, and explore what would have to be true of critical discourse for those obstacles to be circumvented

Sculpture and Space

What is distinctive about sculpture as an artform? I argue that it is related to the space around it as painting and the other pictorial arts are not. I expound and develop Langer's suggestive comments on this issue, before asking what the major strengths and weaknesses of that position might be

Speaking Through Silence: Conceptual Art and Conversational Implicature

I first try to identify what problem, if any conceptual art poses for philosophical aesthetics. It is harder than one might think to formulate some claim about traditional art with which much conceptual art is inconsistent. The idea that sense experience plays a special role in the appreciation of traditional artworks falls foul of literature. Instead I focus on the idea that conceptual art exhibits a particularly loose relation between the properties with which we engage in appreciating it and the properties on which those artistic properties depend. In Part II, I then offer an account of how conceptual art communicates, and attempt to use it to illuminate some prominent features of that art. I suggest it works by frustrating certain fundamental expectations with which we approach it. In this it is analogous to certain ways of indirectly communicating in conversation – certain kinds of conversational implicature. At the close, I ask whether this account allows us to address the problem identified in Part I

Perspective, Convention and Compromise

What is special about picturing according to the rules of perspectival drawing systems? My answer is at once both radical and conciliatory. I think that depiction essentially involves a distinctive experience, an experience of resemblance. More precisely, the picture must be seen as preserving what Thomas Reid (Enquiry 1764) called the "visible figure" of what is represented. It follows from this, and from some other plausible premises, that if a picture is to depict detailed spatial arrangements, rather than simply to represent them in some other, non-pictorial, way, it must conform to perspectival rules. Hence the radicalism. Perspective does not provide uniquely accurate or realistic ways to depict things, but, for certain aspects of the world, the only way to depict them at all. What of the conciliatory aspect of my view? My account of depiction in no way implies that only perspectival pictures can depict anything at all. Indeed, it is quite consistent with a good deal of variation in the marks which might, in the right context, depict a given content. But better still, the factors determining what we see a picture as resembling, and hence partially determining what it depicts, are just those factors emphasized by those who take perspective to be a matter of convention. They include, for instance, the nature of the subject's perceptual environment, and the sorts of pictures to which he has previously been exposed. Thus, even given the radical claim, the variety in ways of depicting a given thing is neither incomprehensible nor indicative of some kind of failure. We can understand perspective's special status without denigrating the alternatives

Beauty and Testimony

I ask whether, and how far, it is possible legitimately to acquire the belief that a given item is beautiful on the basis of someone's testimony that it is. This is an issue that concerned Kant. Kant held that testimony could never be a legitimate source of such judgements, and clearly took his account of aesthetic judgement to explain this fact. I argue that Kant's theory does not, in fact, provide the materials for a satisfactory explanation. Was Kant at least right about the explanadum? While broadly sympathetic to his views on that, I also suggest ways in which they need qualifying. I consider alternative explanations of why testimony should, in general, not be a legitimate source of aesthetic judgement, especially those rooted in anti-realism about the aesthetic. I find these two no more obviously correct, at least in their current state of development

Composite micromechanical modeling using the boundary element method

The use of the boundary element method for analyzing composite micromechanical behavior is demonstrated. Stress-strain, heat conduction, and thermal expansion analyses are conducted using the boundary element computer code BEST-CMS, and the results obtained are compared to experimental observations, analytical calculations, and finite element analyses. For each of the analysis types, the boundary element results agree reasonably well with the results from the other methodologies, with explainable discrepancies. Overall, the boundary element method shows promise in providing an alternative method to analyze composite micromechanical behavior

Advanced underwater lift device

Flexible underwater lift devices ('lift bags') are used in underwater operations to provide buoyancy to submerged objects. Commercially available designs are heavy, bulky, and awkward to handle, and thus are limited in size and useful lifting capacity. An underwater lift device having less than 20 percent of the bulk and less than 10 percent of the weight of commercially available models was developed. The design features a dual membrane envelope, a nearly homogeneous envelope membrane stress distribution, and a minimum surface-to-volume ratio. A proof-of-concept model of 50 kg capacity was built and tested. Originally designed to provide buoyancy to mock-ups submerged in NASA's weightlessness simulators, the device may have application to water-landed spacecraft which must deploy flotation upon impact, and where launch weight and volume penalties are significant. The device may also be useful for the automated recovery of ocean floor probes or in marine salvage applications

Advanced collapsible tank for liquid containment

Tanks for bulk liquid containment will be required to support advanced planetary exploration programs. Potential applications include storage of potable, process, and waste water, and fuels and process chemicals. The launch mass and volume penalties inherent in rigid tanks suggest that collapsible tanks may be more efficient. Collapsible tanks are made of lightweight flexible material and can be folded compactly for storage and transport. Although collapsible tanks for terrestrial use are widely available, a new design was developed that has significantly less mass and bulk than existing models. Modelled after the shape of a sessible drop, this design features a dual membrane with a nearly uniform stress distribution and a low surface-to-volume ratio. It can be adapted to store a variety of liquids in nearly any environment with constant acceleration field. Three models of 10L, 50L, and 378L capacity have been constructed and tested. The 378L (100 gallon) model weighed less than 10 percent of a commercially available collapsible tank of equivalent capacity, and required less than 20 percent of the storage space when folded for transport