Using Math To Design Cities And Supercomputers

caek writes "If you've played Sim City you've wrestled with one of the problems faced by supercomputer designers. Unfortunately there's no GameFAQs.com for the technical staff at Japan's Earth Simulator or Srinidhi Varadarajan and colleagues at Virginia Tech. True enough, they won't have to deal with rising crime or Godzilla but, as hinted at in a recent paper in Journal of Physics A, the physical layout of a massively parallel supercomputer is fundamentally the same problem as minimizing the time commuters spent stuck in traffic jams. Read the rest of my kuro5hin article for a popular explanation."

Comments

Does this surprise anyone?

[Marxist Hacker 42]

It doesn't surprise me. I've been saying for years that the algorithims used for network and resource optimization have real-world applications; that the reverse is also true is simple logic. Now- if we could only apply *nix resource allocation algorithims to food, clothing, shelter, and medical care; perhaps then we'd actually have an economy that works for the people instead of a people who work for the economy.

Re:The Important thing is Rail

[merdark]

Yes, that's all nice, but it doesn't help the many many *existing* cities any. They already have buildings sprawled all over the place.

If you are encouraging building more NEW cities, then I have to totally disagree with you. We need to fix the ones we have somehow. You can't get people out of their cars unless you provide them with a humane way of alternate travel. Trains are good, provided they actually reach people (hard), and are not overcrowded like the subways in Toronto. I voluntarily worked an extra hour every day just to avoid rush out on the overcrowded subways. That kind of crappy mass transit just won't cut it.

Re:The Important thing is Rail

[rewt66]

I read somewhere an article where somebody from Chicago was giving advice to Seattle on their new transit system. The author said that the key to getting people out of their cars is rapid transit - defined as "faster than driving". Just having transit isn't enough. People will still take their cars because it's faster, which equates to more convenient. But if the transit is faster than driving, people are more inclined to take it.

San Francisco added a nice touch to this with their BART system. In some places, they build the rapid transit right up the freeway median. When you're stuck in traffic on the freeway, and the train blows past you at 80 MPH, it tends to make you think, "I wish I was on that!"

Re:The Important thing is Rail

[AmericanInKiev]

Mod this Up.

Often without saying it - That MUST be the effect of shared transit.

This is the primary reason that buses suck.

Buses must have HOV lanes to be a considered alternative.

The other is the cost of parking - London has fees just for entering downtown.

Cities should NOT provide subsidised parking.

They should put that money instead into - as you say - Rapid Transit.

AIK

Re:We need to fix the ones we have somehow.

[AmericanInKiev]

Thanks for your perspective.

I think you may have glossed over a point.

The City must establish LINEAR High speed transit corridors.

Because only LINEAR transit routes can achieve - Rapid - as in faster than an SUV - transportation (After you figure in the cost of waiting around)

Deliberate Haste doesn't mean kicking people out of their homes - it does mean allocating the region for change. - and insisting that any changes - result in higher density outcomes.

Those neighbourhoods are nice precisly *because* they have no high desnsity housing.

This is perception.
When I was in Egypt I stayed in a resort - it was very high density - but also a very nice neighborhood. We had gardens, pools, beaches - well you get the idea.

If cities would reward high density housing with resort grade amenities - they could reclaim their air.

Sure - only one row of houses can really have a nice view - but the theory of shared resources says its better that MORE PEOPLE have this view than fewer.

And housing does not HAVE TO completely ruin the natural beauty - there are aztec designs - and a variety of old world looks which have natural appeal.

The most important task is to alter public opinion - that living near railroad tracks in tenement buildings is sexy.

Making sexy trains, and sexy tenement grounds is the solution to clean air.

AIK

Christopher Alexander - "The Timeless Way..."

[garyebickford]

Object Oriented programmers are already aware of the congruence. Architect Christopher Alexander's books "The Timeless Way of Building" and "A Pattern Language" were the inspiration for the patterns movement in OO programming.

There are important lessons in these books for both urban design and system design. Many architects and urban designers don't like Alexander because his approach is counter to the "power over" (top down) approach to urban design, but encourages supporting bottom up, "power with", design-while-building that is characteristic of vernacular architecture. The problem, as they see it, is that they can't start building until the design is complete - the support systems (as well as the permit process) require it. They're wrong in principle but right in practice, because that's how the support systems already in place work.

Even when designers try to emulate the style of a village, it is still not quite like the real thing that grew over decades or centuries. However, perhaps automation could empower a kind of collaboration and serendipity so that a naive group of 'users' could essentially grow a design.