Author: Alex Wuqi Zhang

I’ve always understood interaction as a process by which elementary particles exchange gauge bosons with each other or when two masses exert force on each other. For me, the simple act of walking down the high-line consists of many interactions such as the collision of atmospheric particles and my body and the exertion of force on the ground by my feet (exertion of force on my feet by the ground). This definition is concrete, tangible, and most importantly, objective: if there is an exchange of force, there is an interaction.

Thinking of interactivity as a continuous variable with relative measures that outline the “degrees” of interaction is a particularly interesting concept. I do agree with the author that interactivity is not merely a boolean property. Perhaps the existence of interactivity can be defined with a simple yes or not, but there’s definitely much more to interactions than just that. Touching a rock versus playing squash are clearly two different “degrees” of interaction. But the question is, how can we quantify the level of interactivity objectively?

I really liked how the author used examples and analogies from a wide spectrum of fields and disciplines (ranging from literature and history to physics and biology) to better portray the concept of universality. The establishment of a universal system in which all parties involved in the field acknowledge and adopt is arguably one of the most important elements of the advancement of the human race. It enables individuals from different corners of the world to communicate and collaborate with each other, solving problems that are sometimes for too difficult for just a handful of people that speak the same language.

Building onto my project from last week, I’ve decided to give the brave souls that successfully complete my insanely difficult maze a sweeter reward than just LEDs lighting up. I originally hoped that I could somehow have Arduino play a short tune (mp3) but then I realized that it actually isn’t that simple. I’d have to utilize this device called “the shield” — which I had no clue how to put together.

I opted for the next best thing: have the LEDs blink out the rhythm of the song I intended to play while I manually produce it with my mouth. (#lol)

The “song” begins the moment the player reaches the end of the maze.

Excuse me for my bad singing:

Unlike conventional informative texts, this book is written in a very colloquial and humorous manner. With his funky analogies and rhetorical questions, Kenn Amdahl is able to effectively convey his message to the reader. The author was not wrong to claim that his reader will enjoy this book even if you have no special desire to learn about electricity. The text was indeed very enjoyable to read.

However, I do feel that the text could improve on its educational value. The very things that made the text interesting sometimes felt quite distracting. Moreover, some of his scientific explanations were rather vague and not all that informative.

Personally, I do prefer traditional textbooks when the objective is to acquire reliable academic information on a certain subject. Nonetheless, this was an interesting and entertaining read.

While strolling through the Baraha at 3am in the morning, I came across the pin ball machine. I gave it a couple tries and noticed that the LEDs lit up when the ball collided with certain areas in the apparatus.

Building on that concept, I created a simple maze that began in the top left corner and ended in the bottom right. When the ball (a ping pong ball wrapped in aluminum foil) reached the end of the maze, it will bridge together the two pieces of aluminum foil that are connected to the LED circuit.

It took me a few tries to get the end-of-maze foil dimensions/placement correct as the surface area in which the ball is actually in contact with the surface is quite small. The ball had to be right in the middle of the two pieces of foil in order for the circuit to be complete.

The following is a demonstration of the maze in action:

IMG_8120