GENERAL ARTIST STATEMENT In my work, I combine my love for Astronomy and Mathematics with my love for Art. My goal is to present various interpretations of astrophysical-cosmological and mathematical concepts, in order to reveal their visual, theoretical, and philosophical implications. I wish to provide an alternate means by which to explore science, through a momentary visual experience of 'living in the universe'; or, of living in that indefinable space between the universe and our earth, our 'selves'.  I am interested in issues of 'vastness', 'the infinite', 'chaos', 'multidimensionality', 'parallel spaces', and the 'relative role of Earth and human consciousness within the Universe'. I hope to open a door for the questioning of our role as observers in our formation of scientific 'truth'. I believe that 'talent' is more a matter of mind than hand, and is cultured through education and analytical thinking.  I hope that my art will stand out for the originality of my subject, and for its in parallel intellectual and aesthetic treatment.  Deeply connected with my subject, I aspire to contribute to bringing science to art and art to science.  We are literally made of the dust of stars. The universe is beyond our reach and awesome to our minds; but it is also, in a sense, 'us'. My future work will fall into any of the following general themes: "Multiple Dimensions", "Static-Dynamic", "Order-Chaos", "Size Relativity", "Infinite-Finite/Bounded-Unbounded", "Spacial-Temporal Extent of the Universe", "Ultimate Universal Speeds", "Concept of The Big Bang", and "Dark Matter".

A N O T H E R   U N I V E R S E STRINGS. HOLES. SCAPES. FOLDS. Four Separate Universes? Four Parallel Universes? Or maybe just One Universe? Another Universe. STRINGS. Elementary particles as vibrating loops. Each form of vibration of the string a different particle or force.  Unity of all particles and forces within the same basic string. Multiple dimensions of space, one source. Another Universe. HOLES.  Regions of space which pull all matter in. Or regions which push matter out.  Time flowing forwards or backwards.  Rotating holes where matter which falls in eventually travels out. Into a black hole and out of a white hole.  Another Universe. SCAPES.  Lightscapes, darkscapes, anotherscapes.  Worlds which may seem familiar, and yet not. Somewhere on Earth? Or perhaps not.  Somewhere between Earth and somewhere else.  Another Universe. FOLDS.  Layers of space and time. Entangled, superceding one another, or harmoniously integrated.  Combining to form new topologies, or dividing to break old ones. Another Universe. STRINGS. HOLES. SCAPES. FOLDS. Four Astronomical Dimensions.  Four Artistic Dimensions.  Space in Art and Art in Space.  Another Universe.

SKY-MAP PROJECT I This is the SKY-MAP PROJECT. It is a potentially infinite series of explorations of the space within the sky-map and the connections among its stars. The constant in each of these drawings is set as the fixed star-points of the map. The variable is the rule or system by which these points are connected to create a certain space. The sum of all possible subspaces would form a complete picture of the special reality of this set of points. This may be viewed as two-dimensional, with respect to the visual world set by the map; or three-dimensional, with respect to the representation of actual positions and distance relationships of stars. Or perhaps the word 'reality' is the key: Are these variations concerned with describing aspects of real space, or are they a fantasyland of 'new cosmologies'? The answer may be both. The word 'cosmology' implies the existence of a 'cosmos', but what type of cosmos these points are a part of, remains a question.

SKY-MAP PROJECT II: TRANSLATIONS This project takes the initial Sky-Map Project one step further. The original series keeps the star points on the map constant, and invents different systems of organizing those points, to bring out visual variations of space and philosophical suggestions about infinite cosmologies. In this series, sets of star points are taken and moved (translated) along or around other sets of points or directionalities. In doing so, I hope to bring forth the following ideas: * Relativity of the meaning of spacial-temporal 'position' * Role of observer's point of view in this relativity * Dynamic nature of this position * Implication of potential 'duplication' or parallel existence of matter/energy in multiple locations at once * Visual positioning of points vs. recognizability of relative locations within group or among neighboring groups * Definition of 'shape' as affected by orientation

SKY-MAP PROJECT III: DISTORTIONS This project takes the initial Sky-Map Project yet another step further. The original series keeps the star points on the map constant, and invents different systems of organizing those points, to bring out visual variations of space and philosophical suggestions about infinite cosmologies. In this series, the drawings of SkyMapProject I are taken and transformed to distort the space they originally create. In doing so, I hope to bring forth the following ideas: * Multiple dimensions and their implications on the fabric of spacetime * Potential of multiple co-existing universes or versions of one universe * Dynamic or ambiguous nature of spacetime * Change in recognizability or definition of one space according to visual representation and reorganization

A DARK MATTER Dark Matter and Dark Energy compose 96% of 'the universe', whatever this 'universe' in itself may 'be'.  This means we only have, or think we have, a 'clear' picture of merely 4% of what is out there, that part being stars, planets, intergalactic gas... The 'visible' part of the universe is equivalent to only 1 hydrogen atom per cubic meter.  And yet this part does not suffice to explain many important phenomena. So there 'is' this dark matter & energy which is necessary to complete the explanation of events such as the rate of expansion of the universe.  But what is this 'dark matter & dark energy'? As an artist I am only asking this question in the sense of wanting to take a stab at thinking about the 'whole' vs. the 'partial', about the role or definition of parts in a whole, about what we think we know vs. what we do know, if anything at all... Is what we think we know really 'there', or is it just a manifestation of our limited human abilities to think and perceive? We try to pinpoint concrete, intuitively 'sensible' objects, elements and phenomena in the universe; we try to categorize them, because this gives us a sense of 'order' and brings us closer to an understanding of existence, time and space. But does this compartmentalization at times perhaps inhibit different ways of imagining 'reality'? The realization that our theories were incomplete when taking into account only our most 'accessible' pieces of space-time, presents the idea of the 'missing pieces' in our understanding.  Each 'blueprint' in this series of drawings is a symbolic representation of one extraction from the 'whole', where the remaining pieces are unknown. A sub-series of drawings deals with the subject of the Microwave Background Anisotropy, a project which reveals conditions as they existed in the early universe by measuring the properties of the cosmic microwave background radiation over the full sky.  These drawings are particularly pertinent as 'blueprints', since both subject in itself, and method by which drawings are made, address an 'extraction', a separation of elements, which elements then reveal a new picture. In our continuous effort to 'fit' the pieces together, we re-arrange, remove, add.  Will this process ever be concluded?  Do we even, as human beings, with our particular mental capabilities, have a shot at doing so?  Or is our best case senario to keep working at approximating the definition of reality, or rather our notion of it?  Furthermore, do our desperate efforts to 'define' maybe force certain theories into place when there is no place for them...?

A MATTER OF SCALE Imagine two spacial positions, one closer to the observer, the second farther.  Then, we magnify position 2 to appear as 'large' as position 1. In doing so, we change our perception of distance; we still have the knowledge of that distance, but have eliminated 'visual distance'.  But if everything is increasing in distance from everything else as the universe expands isotropically, an observer must continually increase magnification to bring objects to an equivalent visual experience.  And this, in turn, takes one further and further from 'visual truth'... When we refer to 'size', what do we mean?  Is 'size' a visually perceived set of dimensions, i.e., dependent on distance from observer?  Or is 'size' a constant volume, independent of an observer's experience?  But is there even a 'constant volume', as everything is expanding?  So then 'visual size' is relative and 'volume size' is constantly changing, so there is no such definite notion of 'size'; only a version of size... We attribute so much significance to this word, this notion, which affects our view of everything on Earth and in the universe, including our own selves.  It's a substantial part of how we, at least perceptually or unconsciously, define the level of significance, relative role and even mere existence of things.  And yet, we cannot define 'size' itself, a cyclical paradox. And if 'visible universe' is ~4% of total existence, then the meaning of 'size' becomes all the more obscure...  Many of my drawings use visual illusionism as both a tool and metaphor for potentially illusionistic character of size and distance.

n DIMENSIONS Classical physics, the physics most compatible with our direct observation, perception and intuition, supports a three-dimensional universe. The position of any object can be described by three spacial values.  Special Relativity introduced the dimension of time. Minkowski spacetime is the mathematical setting in which Special Relativity is formulated- three dimensions of space, combined with a single dimension of time form a four-dimensional manifold representing spacetime.  General Relativity introduced the geometric theory of gravitation, the current description of gravity in modern physics. It unified special relativity and the law of universal gravitation, describing gravity as a property of the geometry of spacetime. The biggest problem in theoretical physics is unifying the theory of General Relativity, which applies to large-scale structures, with Quantum Mechanics, which describes the three fundamental forces acting on the atomic scale. To this end, recent research in the areas of basic particles and interactive forces has revealed that the structure of our universe is likely not simply three- or four-dimensional.  Theories such as String Theory and M-Theory predict that physical space in general has in fact 10 or 11 dimensions.  A possible explanation for this is that space behaves as if 'curled up' in the extra dimensions on a subatomic scale, at the quark/string level or below. Another view holds that dimensions beyond the fourth progressively condense timelines and universes into single spatial points in the higher dimension, until the tenth, where a 0-dimensional point equates to all possible timelines in all possible universes.  Superstring Theory strives to explain all of the particles and fundamental forces of nature within one unit, as vibrations of tiny supersymmetric strings; it postulates that there are seven other dimensions of time and space.  Membrane Theory proposes that the space we are living in is only a layer (membrane) of a multi-dimensional universe.  Then there is Dark Energy, a hypothetical form of energy that permeates all of space and tends to increase the rate of expansion of the universe.  Dark Energy can neither be seen nor observed, but it is claimed it might exist in other dimensions.  The above are only examples illustrating the complex issue of defining multi-dimensionality. The 1884 novel Flatland by Edwin A. Abbott is the best introduction one can find into the matter of perceiving higher dimensions.  Our human minds have difficulty visualizing or intuitively describing higher(more than three) dimensions, because we can only physically move in three spatial ones- or so we are aware of, at least.  Nevertheless, we cannot limit our minds to existing knowledge and tangible experience.  One way to get past this limitation is to think of higher dimensions as additional variables in mathematical equations.  In fact, abstract multi-dimensional space occurs frequently in mathematics, and is a perfectly legitimate construct. Whether or not the 'real' universe in which we live is actually multi-dimensional, is a topic that is being explored in theoretical physics, astrophysics and particle physics.  So then, you may ask, what can art do to contribute to the intellectualization of this problem?  Art can be used to present symbolic visualizations or diagrams of alternate multi-dimensional universes.  In each of my works, I imagine and create a 'space' defined by a particular numerical and qualitative set of dimensions.  The total describes a visual, diagramatic view of a 'spacetime', within a series of potentially infinite multi-dimensional worlds.

INDIVIDUAL PROJECT TEXTS (also on project pages)