Superstrings PerformanceParticles or Strings? Universe is a Buzz with Energy

Marcella Giulia LorenziLCS-BATS, University of Calabria, Italy

Mauro FrancavigliaLCS, University of Calabria, Italy

Dept. of Mathematics, University of Torino, Italy

Abstract “Superstring performance” is a complex work, including an initial interactive installation, from which the performance derives, and a performative part in which performers, generative music and video projections come together. Superstrings was recently presented at the Museum of Cinema of Torino and shown on RAI National TV. It is an interactive performance, in which the public actively participates, inspired the Theory of Superstrings. The so-called “Standard Model” is the currently established theory of Particle Physics. A framework has been proposed in Theoretical Physics, which tries to replace standard particles with so-called “strings” and “superstrings”. These are “extended objects” having one dimension, like real tiny elastic ropes which fill infinitesimally small portions of space. Strings continuously vibrate in SpaceTime generating observable excitations of the physical fields. The Performance is an exquisite mix of “Art & Science”: “Virtual” strings fill the space, a creative process in which the public entangles never ending patterns using elastic ropes, creating a vibrating universe. Generative music is produced, while multicolour lights let strings glow into the dark as laser rays. Performers act within the installation, using corporal mime and dance, and give a final poetic explanation. The language of emotion suspends disbelief. A well-known physicist gives explanations about our universe and current scientific theories made understandable by the installation itself.

Keywords: Interactive Performance, Theory of Strings, Generative Music, Corporal Mime, Museo Nazionale del Cinema di Torino.

Introduction“Superstring performance”, also known as “Particles or Strings? The Universe is a buzz with energy” is a complex work, including an initial interactive installation (DE OLIVEIRA Nicolas et al. 1994; 2003), from which the performance derives, and a performative part in which performers, generative music and video projections come together.Superstring is preferably a site specific installation. According to the space, the artwork generates an intricate elastic pattern, vibrating in Time and Space. Preferred spaces contain supports, columns or other structures if indoor - or trees or gates if outdoor. Anyway if this is not possible, a three meters cubic wire metal empty structure is the “Universe container”. White elastic ribbons of different sizes are used. The installation in itself is really simple, since a bridging of the space is required by the participants. Elastics reels could be left there for other participants to continue. The general public is usually involved in the activity, with no distinction of roles. All participants are invited to create strings deciding a starting and end ending point and interacting with other people and the installation itself. These “virtual” strings formed by elastic ropes do fill the space in the Exhibition Court, by means of an infinite process in which the public helps to generate intricate and never ending patterns. In essence, the space became wrapped in miles and miles of elastic string, going from one point to another, ground to up, wherever anyone wants to attach two endpoints. Attendees are able to enter and bounce around the space, the visual metaphor of the bound space being a pattern for space, like a “Wormhole”, i.e. a loop in SpaceTime where we could as we exited one, see ourselves enter it. As a final output Art and Science merge through the emergence of the artwork itself.This installation is therefore a true and genuine “generative process” that allows to intertwine Art and Complexity, giving space into Contemporary Art to the modern physical notions of “Strings” and “Superstrings”, which are among the most fascinating and challenging issues of current Physics of fundamental interactions. The result turns out to be a generative installation with “generative shots”, that can be also published on the web. A physicist (one of us, M. Francaviglia) is always available to give scientific explanations about light phenomena and Maxwell’s and Einstein’s theories of Electromagnetism, Relativity and SpaceTime, Particles and Superstring Theories.In origin, Superstring installation is a conceptual and generative artwork, an installation ideated and created together with Michael Petry (Director of MOCA London) and realized for the first time in Torino (Italy) in the occasion of the Workshop “Art, Complexity and Technology: Their Interaction in Emergence”, held in Villa

Gualino, at the ISI Foundation, from 5 to 6 May, 2005 (ISI 2005). An analogous installation was made shortly after in the occasion of another scientific event, namely the Conference “Mathematics, Art and Cultural Industry”, held in Cetraro (Calabria, Italy) from 19 to 21 May, 2005 (Francaviglia et al., 2005). This second event was orchestrated “in loco” by one of us (M.G. Lorenzi), via a telematic contact between Michael Petry in London and the Conference place, and it was accompanied by a live interview to one of us (M. Francaviglia) acting as a physicist. A third installation was organized by the three of us in Milano (Italy), on the occasion of the 8th “Generative Art Conference” (GA2005), held at the local Polytechnical University from 15 to 17 December, 2005 (Francaviglia, Lorenzi et al., 2005). Subsequently, the installation was enriched by a robotic artifact. The pictures taken and the videos shot during the three installations have been collected in a DVD produced only in a limited edition, in few copies. The DVDs were then part of a Generative Art process presented during the GA2006 Conference, again in Milano (Italy), (Francaviglia, Lorenzi et al., 2006). All the copies were put on the floor, forming a matrix, within a limited space. A small robotic artifact, built using Lego robotics kits and RCX computer-brick and code, was programmed so to trace on this space (the robot’s “digital universe”) a “visual superstring”, which changed depending both on the interaction with the public and the configuration of the DVDs on the floor. i.e., whenever a participant had chosen a direction it left a trace on the DVDs surfaces, the path was modified by sensing the space, etc..  At the end, a unique artwork was generated.We decided to build a “roverbot” with four wheels, to give it the stability to perform its task. The robot was then programmed to go from one point to the other in the “arena” (the delimited space formed by the DVDs matrix) interacting with the public (who chose the initial position) and changing automatically its direction when meeting an obstacle. Meanwhile, a marker, connected to some sensors, would draw a ‘virtual string’ on the surface of the DVDs. Of course all the process depends on the initial and subsequent positions and behaviour, so that each string is unique. This was a new, different way of representing the superstring idea. This version was presented during Generative Art 2006 (Milano, Italy) and also at ECAL 2007 (9 th European Conference on Artificial Life, Lisboa, Portugal – see Francaviglia, Lorenzi et al., 2007) and ESOF 2008 (Barcelona, Spain).The “Superstring Installation” wants to be – and in fact it is - an exquisite demonstration of how a clever mix of Art and Science is feasible, also providing at the same time a clear and self-explanatory example of the deep cultural challenges that are currently offered by the fast growing field of “Emergence in Art”. The installation is in fact a creative and generative process to be held and repeated at the suitable occasion of Conferences and Workshops seeing the joint participation of artists and scientists; an artwork which - by means of physical interactions that strongly involve both the artist and the public - generates, step by step, an installation that is never ending, continuously changing and dynamically oscillating in Space and Time, while arousing the curiosity to know more about the Superstrings Theory itself.In each one of the quoted occasions it has therefore been (and again will be in later occasions) a beautiful example of  “Emergence”. Moreover, it is fully embedded into the current view on “Generative Approaches to Art” since, according to the current definition of “Generative Art” (Galanter, 2003), the most important outcome of the installation is not its “final state” - a state, in fact, which can even be inexistent, as the installation could in principle be an endless process and can be changed each time one adds a further string to the emerging pattern - but rather the very dynamical interactive process which step by step, piece of string by piece of string, generates the installation itself, together with its spatial and temporal relations with the surrounding environment (the embedding “SpaceTime”) as well as within itself (the “internal space” of hidden degrees of knowledge).A new version of the Installation, Superstring Performance, that included in addition to the original version two performers and a reader, was presented for the first time during the National Italian SIGRAV (Relativity) conference, held at the University of Calabria in September 2008 (SIGRAV, 2008), and then in other locations. The National Italian Television RAI dedicated two “specials” to it (Superstring). Finally, as part of the “Painting with Light” project (Lorenzi, Francaviglia, 2007), it was invited to participate at Euronight 2008, within Scotiabank Nuit Blanche in Toronto (see Image 1 and 2). Four pictures related to it and a short video of the performance were also exhibited during the International event “L’Universe Invisible”, held in Paris (2009) at the UNESCO Headquarters (L’Universe Invisible).

Image 1 and 2: Superstrings at Nuit Blanche Toronto event, 2008. Image reproduces the ambience the participants were immersed in, while image two, taken with flash light, was made to make the persons visible in the

same context. Images Copyright M. G. Lorenzi.

Modelling the World by Particle PhysicsWhy Superstrings…? What is a “Superstring”? Does it really exist? “Strings” (and their “supersymmetric” partners, i.e. “Superstrings”) do belong to those fascinating and challenging fields of imagination that lead Mankind to wonder: “Which is the ultimate and intimate structure of the Universe which surrounds us…?”  - “Are particles and quarks the smallest constituents of matter…?” – “Do space-time vibrations pass through evanescent point-like objects like particles are or, rather, is there any space in the Universe for something extended which vibrates as an elastic rope does…?”And – moreover – “What do strings and superstrings have to do with everyday life and especially with the artistic sense of Nature…?” – “Why should an artist and performer bother with such exotic concepts as strings and superstrings…?”The whole set of “Superstring Installations” serve as an answer – an astonishing and emotionally intensive answer, indeed – to these last questions. It also allows to stimulate the imagination to run through this challenging field and – why not…? – to begin establishing a less dramatic interaction between Art and Science, two disciplines which could seem to be faraway from each other and, on the contrary, evolve and progress as intertwined parts of human thought and culture.In a 2003 issue of “Scientific American” a conversation with Brian Greene (the American scientist who several years ago was among those scientists who ideated the very notion of “string”) was published, with the title “The future of string theory” (Greene 2003). There one can read a number of interesting statements, among which we like to quote the following: 

A knot difficult to disentangle – String Theory seems to be the most modern and yet incomprehensible theory of Physics. At the beginning even specialists were annoyed by its extremely complicated formulation, while other physicists were rather skeptical about it because of its difficulties in providing concrete experimental evidences. The rest of the

World, on the other hand, was totally unaware of its existence. String theorists were already at difficulty when trying to explain <<why>> the subject of their investigations was so exciting, so that an old dream of Einstein – a fully unified theory of reality – could be obtained, in order to open wider windows towards the understanding of deep questions like the very existence of Universe as we see it today. 

Simple in fact as an idea as well as extremely complicated in its mathematical structure, String Theory is still today one of the most intriguing domains of investigation for Theoretical Physics. Many scientists believe it will be the ultimate answer to several fundamental questions of Theoretical Physics; others still remain doubtful about its real possibility to be the ultimate explanation of the fine structure of matter in the Universe. Nevertheless, its scientific and philosophical validity is totally (at least potential) capability of giving a “unitary description” of all kinds of elementary matter, but also because of its intrinsic mathematical beauty, for the great stimulus it gave to deeper and deeper investigations about the fundamental forces which keep matter together, as well as for its somewhat astonishing contributions to the developments of specific branches of pure Mathematics. To such an extent that, finally, String Theory entered the imagination of public at large. Greene also states:

… the <<external>> World begun to give some attention to String Theory. Woody Allen has made ironical claims on it in an article appeared in a <<New Yorker>> issue of July 2003. Probably it is the first time that someone has thought to Calabi-Yau spaces as an allegory of love stories at the workplace. (see the article in Allen Woody 2003)

Modern Physics postulates the existence of a few elementary “fundamental” interactions (they are actually assumed to be four, according to a commonly accepted model of matter). A “classical” view on these interactions postulates moreover that the interactions themselves are carried by so-called “elementary particles” (together with their sub-particle constituents, called “quarks”) that are grouped, according to precise mathematical symmetries rules, in suitable “families”. According to this classical view on sub-atomic Physics elementary particles together with their sub-particles should be, in a sense, the ultimate constituents of matter; theoretically, they are taken to be points in space-time, having no shape nor any real dimension. Practically, they are considered to be extremely tiny objects, kinds of infinitesimal balls of matter whose physically sensible dimension is substantially evanescent. The ensuing particle model is usually called the “Standard Model of Particle Physics” (Griffiths 1987). Among the particles that are better known to a general audience are “photons” (the particles which correspond to light propagation as they carry light around the Universe) as well as “electrons” and “protons” (which are responsible for electromagnetic interactions). Maybe less known, but frequently quoted also in divulgative reports on Physics, are “neutrinos” (which should at least in part contribute to the so-called and still mysterious “dark matter” existing in the Universe and considered to be responsible of several contradictory experiments of present days Physics) and “gravitons” (which are responsible for the attractive force between bodies, usually called “gravitation”). While at the time of Special and General Relativity (1905-1916; see Lorenzi, Fatibene et al. 2007) only two elementary forces where known – the gravitational and the electromagnetic force - contemporary Physics recognizes the existence of two other fundamental forces, called respectively “weak and strong electronuclear forces” (fully theorized around the ‘50s) which – altogether – are responsible of the cohesion of matter as it is experimentally observed in Nature. Electromagnetic and electronuclear theories are also called “gauge theories”, according to a fairly accepted jargon.  According to the commonly accepted model, these four forces are the only “fundamental” ones (in the sense that all other interactions have to be generated by a mix of these four constituents); they represent the only fundamental ties between particles, which transport the interaction, and form the components of a still incomplete picture which Physics is currently trying to construct as a coherent and “unified” model of all interactions among the Universe components. A sort of “theory of everything”….. the ultimate formulation of which is still elusive and represents one of the most important theoretical challenges of XXI Century Physics, still unresolved in its full generality.          Strings and Superstrings as a Possible “Ultimate Theory of Everything”Each theoretical construction aimed at describing “physical reality” should reasonably keep into account the need to describe the four forces abovementioned, as well as the need to obtain “particles” at least as a low-energy approximation of the theory itself. This is fairly coherent with current observations both at galactic and extra-galactic scale and at the level of particle accelerators in Physics laboratories. As we said above, in the usual particle models - and in particular in the so-called “standard model” - elementary particles are thought of as point-like shapeless entities, like small round balls without any real dimension, that do not occupy sensible portions of space (better, of four-dimensional SpaceTime). It is evident that this is not possible if a continuum model is envisaged, although a coherent theory of fields in which particles are small but not evanescent objects – having therefore a finite though small size and, accordingly, a tiny three-dimensional extension – is not satisfactory and in fact inexistent.        A different framework has been therefore proposed in Theoretical Physics, which tries to replace standard particles with so-called “strings” (Greene 2000). These are “extended objects” having just one dimension,

like real tiny elastic ropes which fill infinitesimally small (or even larger) portions of space (maybe ordinary space-time, or better a space-time of dimension even higher than four). Strings might be “open strings” (i.e., they are ropes with two different and separate endpoints) or “closed strings” (i.e., they are loops in SpaceTime; ropes with the topology of a circle, or, if one prefers, open strings which have been closed by letting their two end-points coalesce in a single point). Strings oscillate and vibrate continuously in SpaceTime – like real elastic strings do in everyday life and experience - and their vibrations are thought to generate excitations of the physical fields, i.e. the physical effects which a physical field theory should produce as “observables” that, in turn, could be described as ordinary particle states. Of course the Mathematics and the Physics of such theories are much more complicated and the model described above is just a toy description for non-specialists, but the intimate essence of the “Strings World” is exactly that one.  The terminology “superstrings” is just a jargon for specialists. It refers to an extension of string theory which keeps suitably into account the fact that particles are grouped into two main families, so-called “Bosons” and “Fermions”, that obey different and mutually exclusive statistical rules. These names come from the proper names of the famous scientists Bose and Fermi; the difference between these two kinds of particles refers to the validity of the so-called “exclusion principle of Pauli” which, as mentioned, eventually separates particles into these two mutually exclusive families. Bosons are described by mathematical objects which obey scalar, vector or tensorial rules of transformation; Fermions obey instead to “spinorial rules”. All so-called “super-descriptions” of reality are based on suitable mathematical and physical frameworks that allow stronger exchanges between these two a priori somewhat separate worlds, i.e. a unified description of both kinds of matter in single unitary “packets” which strongly entangle Bosons and Fermions together.All these theories are quite difficult to follow and understand, even because there is no way of having a visualization that could be helpful in this task. In fact Strings are very tiny. They cannot be detected directly, since their dimension is much below “the Planck scale”, i.e. the threshold of observability that is dictated by Quantum Mechanics through Heisenberg’s “Principle of Indetermination”.By making of them an installation and performance, in which the public at the beginning just participates with a “childish” enthusiasm, thus “suspending the disbelief”, they can “feel the vibrations” of the “living Universe” made of real elastic ropes which vibrate in the structure they are building with their own hands. At the end they will be told that this could be a model of the Universe, which gives them an immediate insight!As a final output Art and Science merge through the emergence of the artwork itself. A live copy of the “vibrating Universe” is built through the interaction of the public, creating bridges between the elements of the space and the participants as well: the vibrations are transmitted at each movement, connecting them. Also distant participants could interact through digital connections. Generative music is also produced thanks to sensors, while LED multicolour lights let the white elastic glow into the dark as laser rays do. By its very nature, made of elastic ropes that cross each other in a fast growing and never self-repeating pattern, the Superstring Installation has also deep relations with another branch of Mathematics, i.e. the so-called “Theory of Knots”.

Superstrings performanceIdeally the physical installation starts the first day of the event and is modified and generated throughout all the duration of the event, culminating with the performance. As we said above, by its very nature the ”Superstrings Installation” fully belongs to the current mainstream of “Generative Art” (Galanter, 2003) as the most important outcome of the installation is not its “final state” but rather the interactive and creative process in Spacetime. According to Einstein, in fact, the basic structure of our world is SpaceTime and things exist in a SpaceTime continuum, a world of four dimensions: height, width, depth and time. A generative process is usually referred to as “setting in motion”: motion is the “Essence of Life”; to be alive is to move. The Superstring Installation is exactly in this sense a creative and generative process, that - by means of physical interactions involving both the artist and the public - generates, step by step, an installation that is never ending, continuously changing and dynamically oscillating in Space and Time.

Image 3: Superstrings performance. Image Copyright M. G. Lorenzi.

Within the script we wrote, there are also some references to oriental philosophies and conceptions, which are much older than our contemporary scientific ideas, for example, references to Deepak Chopra’s idea of Coincidences (Chopra 1998). Indeed the performance starts as a dream of a scientist studying superstrings after finding on his desk a book from Chopra. The script makes also connections to the philosophical bases of Quantum mechanics, the branch of physics providing a mathematical description of the behavior and interaction of matter and energy (see Quantum mechanics), at the sub-microscopic level. As regards the mise-en-scène, the generative music provided by Enrico Cupellini (Cupellini et al. 2010) has a great part in creating the particular “vibrating” atmosphere. Generative music follows two processes: a genetic algorithm creates numerical sequences and subsequently these sequences are transformed into melodic patterns. The sounds are particularly deep and resonating, to evoke the fact that Universe is continuously vibrating. Meanwhile, the recorded performance goes on twin screens, as in possile parallel universes in which the reality goes back and forth through Wormholes. In String Theory we must remark that, according to “Mirror Symmetry”, what happens in a world is mirrored in another one.The live performance includes two performers (Giada Grandinetti and Monica Rovito) dancing and “moving” within the structure, and an actress (Marisa Casciaro) reading our poetic text that gives a final explanation of our “vibrating Universe” full of Superstrings, in a pertinent sound and lighting environment. They are all part of the company called “Jeu de Dames”: this is not by chance, since the name comes from the first pièce of Étienne Decroux. Indeed the performers themselves were trained to perform the action following Corporeal Mime.

Mime and Corporeal MimeMime is the most ancient performing Art in the world and, still today, attracts people in a very deep, intuitive way. Why? In its portrayal of emotion, thought and experience through the body, mime transcends cultural barriers because it is based on expression and not on appearance. Mime is considered to be a “spontaneous language” (see Mime).Historically, mime has passed through many different forms, from Primitive Dance to Greek and Roman Pantomime, from “Commedia dell’Arte” to the tradition of Debureau, from Asian Theatre to the Russian and Polish Schools of Mime, from the Music hall and Vaudeville to the Cinema... Over centuries, in both the west and east, many artists and masters contributed to the evolution of this art form. The art of mime is a multi-faceted world, at times totally silent and at others welcoming the use of spoken text and music.

A great innovation was developed by Etienne Decroux, with the introduction of Corporeal Mime, a practice stems from the theatrical experiments of the early 20th century (Appia, Craig, and Copeau). Its objective is to place drama inside the moving body, rather than to substitute gesture for speech as in Pantomime. In this medium, the mime must apply to physical movement those principles that are at the heart of Drama: pause, hesitation, weight, resistance and surprise. Corporeal mime accentuates the vital importance of the body and physical action on stage. Etienne Decroux's aim was to create a theatre based on the physicality of the actor allowing the creation of a more metaphorical theatre. This tradition has now grown and corporeal mime is taught in many major theatrical schools (see Theatre de l’Ange Fou).To many theatre historians, Etienne Decroux belongs to that family of Director/Pedagogues such as Gordon Craig and his theories of the super marionnette, the biomechanics of Meyerhold, Stanislavsky's actor as the master of physical action, Chekov’s psychological gesture, Grotowski's laboratory and the visions of Artaud.Decroux created this method and technique for creative performers wishing to transform their ideas into a physical reality, in order to devise a new style of theater "making visible the invisible", as Decroux put it.Daniel Stein, a teacher out of the lineage of Etienne Decroux, says about physical theatre:

I think physical theatre is much more visceral and audiences are affected much more viscerally than intellectually. The foundation of theater is a live, human experience, which is different from any other form of art that I know of. Live theatre, where real human beings are standing in front of real human beings, is about the fact that we have all set aside this hour; the sharing goes in both directions. The fact that it is a very physical, visceral form makes it a very different experience from almost anything else that we partake of in our lives. I don’t think we could do it the same way if we were doing literary-based theatre. 

The objectives of corporeal mime are to enable the actor to become more autonomous in creating metaphor-based physical theater pieces, which may include text, but are not based on text, i.e., to give the actor greater access to physical metaphors in work in traditional plays, and to increase the actor's strength, agility, flexibility and imaginative powers.Corporeal mimes seek to express abstract and universal ideas and emotions through codified movements of the entire body (but most especially the trunk, as the face and hands are confined to a secondary role in this movement form). Some corporeal mimes write their own texts, as did the Greek mime-authors, integrating the mime-actor's art with the author's. They also include props, costumes, masks, lighting effects and music. Because it contains movement expression along with other elements, it is often loosely alluded to as physical or movement theater. It may be properly called the art of the “thinking body”.Decroux taught that the mime must begin like a cinema actor and finish like an acrobat. His improvisation exercises help in fact the actor to have more presence while at the same time exploring a greater range of physical expressivity (Decroux 1963; Leabhart 2007, Pezin 2003).

Performing Art and Computer TechnologiesPerformance Art (see Performance art) is a traditionally interdisciplinary performance presented to a variegate audience. Performance may be either scripted or unscripted, random or carefully orchestrated; spontaneous or otherwise carefully planned with or without audience participation. The performance can be live or via media; the performer can be present or absent. It can be any situation that involves four basic elements: time, space, the performer's body, or presence in a medium, and a relationship between performer and audience. Performance Art can happen anywhere, in any venue or setting and for any length of time. The actions of an individual or a group at a particular place and in a particular time constitute the work.Performance Art is a term usually reserved to refer to a conceptual art which conveys a content-based meaning in a more drama-related sense, rather than being simple performance for its own sake for entertainment purposes. It largely refers to a performance which is presented to an audience, but which does not seek to present a conventional theatrical play or a formal linear narrative, or which alternately does not seek to depict a set of fictitious characters in formal scripted interactions. It therefore can include action or spoken word as a communication between the artist and audience, or even ignore expectations of an audience, rather than following a script written beforehand.Performance artists often challenge the audience to think in new and unconventional ways, break conventions of traditional arts, and break down conventional ideas about "what art is" (Performance art wiki).During the past decade experimentation with computer technology within the Performing Arts has dramatically increased. Digital media has been increasingly incorporated into live theater and dance, and new forms of interactive performance have emerged in participatory installations, on CD-ROM, and on the Web. Steve Dixon (Dixon 2007) traces the evolution of these practices, finding precursors to today's digital performances in past forms of theatrical technology that range from the deus ex machina of classical Greek drama to Wagner's Gesamtkunstwerk (concept of the total artwork – see Gesamtkunstwerk)i and draws parallels between contemporary work and the theories and practices of Constructivism, Dada, Surrealism, Expressionism, Futurism, and multimedia pioneers of the twentieth century. To document and analyze contemporary digital performance practice, Dixon considers changes in the representation of the body, space, and time. He considers virtual bodies, avatars, and digital doubles, as well as performances by artists

including Stelarc, Robert Lepage, Merce Cunningham, Laurie Anderson, Blast Theory, and Eduardo Kac. He investigates new media’s novel approaches to creating theatrical spectacle, including virtual reality and robot performance work, telematic performances in which remote locations are linked in real time, Webcams, and online drama communities, and considers the "extratemporal" illusion created by some technological theater works. We may recall that a Gesamtkunstwerk (i.e., a total work of Art) is a work of Art that makes use of all or many Arts forms or strives to do so. This term was first used by the German writer and philosopher Trahndorff  in 1827. The German opera composer Richard used it in 1849. The word has later become particularly associated with Wagner's aesthetic ideals (Wagner 1993).Wagner used in fact the exact term “Gesamtkunstwerk” (which he spelt “Gesammtkunstwerk”) on only two occasions, in his 1849 essays "Art and Revolution" and "The Artwork of the Future", where he spoke of his ideal of unifying all works of Art via Theatre. He also used in these essays many similar expressions such as “the consummate artwork of the future” and “the integrated drama” and frequently referred also to “Gesamtkunst”. Such a work of Art was to be the clearest and most profound expression of a folk legend, though abstracted from its nationalist particulars to a universal humanist fable.

Making Visible the InvisibleAs the famous writer and literature critics Marcel Proust (1871-1927) said once: “The real voyage of discovery consists of not in seeking new landscapes but in having new eyes”. We like also to mention that the painter, engraver and writer Odilon Redon (1840-1916) stated once: “My originality consists in putting the logic of the visible to the service of the invisible”.According to The Oxford English Dictionary, 1989, “to visualize” means “To form a mental vision, image, or picture of something not visible or present to sight, or of an abstraction; to make visible to the mind or imagination”.Devoted to the use of “images” (which could be physical or mental representations) in the “Language of Science” an impressive international Conference was organized in 2007 by the University of Urbino (Italy), under the title “L’Immagine del Discorso Scientifico: Statuti e Dispositivi di Visualizzazione” (that is: The image in Scientific discourse: visualization statutes and tools). We presented there a lecture on “Digital Art in Scientific Communication” (Lorenzi et al. 2009). In the same Proceedings Luciano Boi utilizes three examples from physical-mathematical sciences and psychology of perception (Boi 2009):

(i) La nécessité de parler d’un niveau symbolique et/ou scientifique de la perception ; celle-ci prolonge la perception au-delà des limites physiologiques et physiques et elle est fondamentale en vue de connaître les structures invisibles ou les phénomènes à très grande échelle ne pouvant pas être perçus directement […]

And Fontanille said in the same occasion (Fontanille 2009):L’imagerie scientifique pose quelques problèmes redoutables à la sémiotique visuelle, planaire ou « de l’image ». […] la collusion ordinaire entre les effets iconiques et les effets référentiels est convertie au moins en tensions et compétition, si ce n’est en contradiction. […] La structure d’expérience de l’imagerie scientifique est nécessairement plus complexe que celle de l’image représentative classique ; elle comprend une instance d’expérience scientifique et une instance pratique. […] toutes les autres structures d’expérience, et notamment tous les types de « réalisme » (réalisme scientifique, réalisme représentationnel, réalisme pratique, réalisme mythique) peuvent être construits comme des « réductions-distorsions » de cette structure canonique. L’imagerie scientifique apparaît de ce point de vue comme un « laboratoire » sémiotique pour la description des « régimes de croyance » de l’image.

About the notion of “Making visible the invisible” we mention also from Stuart McKee (see McKee) that scientists have used images as tools for discovery, analysis and communication for centuries. Compared to today’s scientists, however, Leonardo da Vinci, Andreas Vesalius and Robert Hooke had it easy. The discoveries that scientists are making today are no longer synonymous with what they can see, or even sense. Much of what remains to be discovered about the physical world is hardly palpable, but is speculative, elusive, liminal or invisible. As McKee says: “[…] Advanced tools now allow researchers to learn more […] yet they also demand unprecedented skills of interpretation and visualisation. […]”.Once a contemporary image succeeds as a tool for analysis, it must then be reworked as a tool for presentation, which requires a comprehensive understanding of the varying levels of interpretative authority that readers bring to their media. The MIT-sponsored forum, entitled ‘Image and Meaning 2: Discovering New Visual Expressions for Science and Technology’, provided a rare opportunity for the designers and scientists to share their experiences with diverse creative processes, gain greater fluency in using one another’s technologies, and develop innovative methods for explaining complex phenomena. Science is commonly interpreted using metaphors, and the forum participants had much to say about the difficulties that arise from re-contextualising their data for popular consumption.Not speaking about general public, even scientists must often spend hundreds of hours staring at a single image to make sense of it. Complex images may be more comprehensive (and more correct to fellow

scientists), but they can be difficult for non-experts to understand. Idealised representations are simpler, but they may also be incomprehensible to an audience that has no experience reading scientific shorthand. It might be questioned whether the attendees, as a whole, might attempt to develop better tools for interpreting complexity that would work across the range of science disciplines.We also like to mention from the recent Conference ADS-VIS2011 (“Making visible the invisible: Art, Design and Science in Data Visualisation” – see ADS-VIS2011) about “interdisciplinary exchange and debate into the questions that arise in the process of collaborating on data visualisations that involve arts, design and sciences (multi-disciplinary, inter-disciplinary, trans-disciplinary). “Data visualisation” encompasses as vast range of practice. It reaches from clear and unambiguous mappings and elucidating interactive animations of data, all the way to sonifications and more experimental physical installations.Accessible technology and open-data formats have resulted in works of unprecedented scale and complexity - often the result of collaboration between different disciplines.This has resulted in an increased visibility of visualisations, both on the web and in the physical world, as a device to communicate scientific data in a more tangible and evocative way. Since a good Communication of Science has in the XXI Century to pass through Digital Technologies (Francaviglia et al. 2008).Touching the emotions of the public, today we have also the possibility of trying to give answers to fundamental human questions stimulating at the same time new considerations and (why not?) doubts which Science is based on.

The Superstring Performance at Museo del Cinema during ESOF 2010Superstring performance has been presented within the ESOF 2010 event, in a special, emblematic and fascinating location, the “Museo Nazionale del Cinema” in Torino (the National Cinema Museum of Torino) (see Particles; Museo del Cinema). Yet it is not a “museum”, at least not in the traditional sense” of the term. Those who have already visited it understand what we mean. And those who are planning on visiting it, will be surprised to discover what a special and unique place it is.The Museum is one of the most important of its kind in the world thanks to it vast collection and the many different scientific and educational activities it carries out. But what makes it truly unique is its special exhibit setup. The museum is located inside the Mole Antonelliana, a bizarre and fascinating XIX Century monument which is the symbol of the City of Torino. And the various areas inside the Mole Antonelliana were the starting point for the Swiss set designer François Confino who, with talent and imagination, multiplied the museum’s itineraries. He created a spectacular presentation that offers visitors continuous and unexpected visual and acoustic stimuli, just like when we watch a film that involves and moves us.The Museum is more than a museum and whoever enters it is not just a visitor but also an explorer, an author, an actor, a spectator… to whom the Museum offers the emotions of an experience that cannot be easily forgotten and will remain forever in the visitor’s soul.Torino has an important place in the history of Cinema, soon after Lumière brothers had patented their Cinematographe. Italy was very active in these first years, creating film industry companies in Torino, Roma, Milano and Napoli. In addition, between 1911 and 1919, Italy was the first country to start a new avant-garde movement in the cinema production, inspired by the Futurism movement in that country – (see Cinema of Italy).Created by Euroscience, ESOF (Euroscience Open Forum, see ESOF) is the biennial pan-European meeting dedicated to scientific research and innovation. At ESOF meetings leading scientists, researchers, young researchers, business people, entrepreneurs and innovators, policy makers, science and technology communicators and the general public from all over the world discuss new discoveries and debate the direction that research is taking in the sciences, humanities and social sciences. ESOF is unique in that it is both international and multidisciplinary. ESOF takes place every two years, in a major European city (Stockholm, Munich, Barcelona, Torino, Dublin...) and presents breakthroughs in disciplines as varied as mathematics, music, geography, genetics etc. through a range of different formats including lectures, workshops etc.. ESOF therefore presents and discusses the frontiers of scientific and technological research in Europe, contributes to the development of a European Scientific Identity together with bridging the gap between science and society and stimulates policies to support scientific research.Unlike other scientific conferences, ESOF’s Scientific Programme is multidisciplinary and is complemented by three other programmes. These are the Career Programme which is geared specifically towards young European researchers, the Science to Business Programme which addresses in particular business people and potential entrepreneurs and the Science in the City Programme which hosts mainly cultural and artistic events within the city in order to bring scientific culture to the general public. Furthermore, ESOF targets the media in all its forms thanks to a specific agenda dedicated to discussion on science communication and also expands its outreach through its exhibition which is a display case for scientific and technological research in Europe and its social and satellite events which are activities and conferences held in the host city. Superstrings performance, together with another play we were involved in, inspired by Einstein’s youth

in Italy, namely “In train with Albert” by Edoardo Erba and Klesidra, was presented conveniently in this context. ConclusionsAs we claimed before, Superstrings Installation is at the same time an exquisite demonstration of how a clever mix of Art and Science is feasible and also a clear example of the cultural challenges offered by the fascinating and fast growing field of “Emergence in Art”. In the Superstring performance, moreover, the onlookers may easily feel a kind of “suspension of disbelief”, since the Performance is a kind of “metaphoric performance” that goes through fundamental human (and thus science) questions.In the past centuries the relation between Art and Science was very strong, but then the two disciplines were separated, and it is only recently that the two are intermingled in new, different ways. In this framework, we have promoted a new website, www.scienceandart.info, as a final dissemination output of our European project SCIENAR (Scientific Scenarios and Art), under the Culture EU Program (Agreement Number 2008-2254/001-001 CTU-MECOAN - see SCEINAR). Today’ s artworks are more and more interdisciplinary and intermediatic and creating new messages for their audiences.Marvin Minsky (Minsky 1999) points out the importance of artistic representations to better undestand scientific concepts: “No matter what one’s purposes, perhaps the most powerful methods of human thought are those that help us find new kinds of representations. Why is this so important? Because each new representation suggests a new way of understanding-and if you understand something only one way, then you scarcely understand it at all. Perhaps this is the way the arts so often precede the flowerings of culture”.Moreover, Wilson pushes the concepts even further (Wilson 2002), demonstrating through a rich variety of examples that “The role of the artist is not only to interpret and spread scientific knowledge, but to be an active partner in determining the direction of research”.Following Wilson, we may also say that “the cultural convergence of Art, Science and Technology provides ample opportunity for artists to challenge the very notion of how Art is produced and to call into question its subject matter and its function in society” (Wilson 2002), and also that: “Any attempt to cross the disciplinary borders between art and science will confront this disjunction – today’s incarnation of C. P. Snow’s <<Two cultures>> theory” (Snow 1960). We may conclude by remarking that in “Principles of research” (Einstein 1934), Albert Einstein stated once that the artist and the scientist each substitute a self-created world for the experiential one, with the goal of transcendence. Superstring Installations and Performance try to move in exactly this direction, by subtly intertwining Performing Arts, Cinema, Generative Music, Installation Art, Digital Performances and Modern Science, Corporeal Mime and, above all, “emotions” in the search of the ultimate reality of micro- and macro-cosmic structures in the Universe we are all part of.

BibliographyADS-VIS2011: Making visible the invisible: Art, Design and Science in Data Visualisationhttp://www.hohlwelt.com/en/conferences/visible.htmlAllen Woody, Strung Out, in APS. This article originally appeared in the July 28, 2003, issue of The New Yorker. http://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/200311/zero-gravity.cfmBOI, Luciano - “Visualizzazione topologica, funzioni semiotiche dell'immagine e cambiamenti nel pensiero scientifico”, Visible 5 (2009)CHOPRA Deepak, (1998) Synchrodestiny, Nightingale Conant, ISBN 1-905953-04-6CINEMA of Italy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cinema_of_ItalyCUPELLINI, Enrico, FRANCAVIGLIA, Mauro – “Sound Trails: Waveforms and Interactive Objects inside 3-D Virtual Environments”: APLIMAT - Journal of Applied Mathematics, 3 (1), 47-52 (2010) – ISSN 1337-6365DE OLIVEIRA Nicolas, OXLEY Nicola, PETRY Michael (1994) (with text by M. Archer) -  Installation Art, Thames & Hudson, London (reprinted 2004)DE OLIVEIRA Nicolas, OXLEY Nicola, PETRY Michael (2003) (foreword by J. Crary) - Installation art in the new millenium. The empire of the senses, Thames & Hudson, LondonDECROUX Etienne (1963) - Paroles sur le mime, Paris, GallimardDIXON Steve (2007) - Digital Performance. A History of New Media in Theater, Dance, Performance Art, and Installation, with contributions by Barry Smith, MIT Press, Boston, MA, USA EINSTEIN Albert (1934) - Essays in science, Philosofical Library, New York, USAESOF 2008, Euro Science Open Forum, Barcelona July 18-22, 2008http://www.esof2008.org/ESOF 2010, Euro Science Open Forum, Torino, July 2-7, 2010http://www.esof2010.org/FONTANILLE, Jacques – “Iconicité, référence et «réalisme» de l’imagerie scientifique”, Visible 5 (2009)FRANCAVIGLIA Mauro et al. (2005) - Matematica, Arte e Industria Culturale, Proceedings of "Mathematics, Art and Cultural Industry", Cetraro, 19-21 may 2005; CD-Rom designed and created by Marcella Giulia LORENZI, EGS – University of Calabria, Cosenza, Italy

FRANCAVIGLIA, Mauro, LORENZI, Marcella Giulia (2008) – “Art & Mathematics – A New Pathway” in: Proceedings of the Conference “Communicating Mathematics in the Digital Era, Aveiro 15-18 September 2006” (CMDE2006); Chapter 21; J.M. Borwein, E.A.M. Rocha & J.F. Rodrigues Eds.; A.K. Peters Ltd. (Wellsley, Mass., 2008), pp. 265-278FRANCAVIGLIA, Mauro, LORENZI Marcella Giulia, PETRY, Michael (2005) – “The Space Between - Superstring Installation III”, in: Proceedings of “8th Generative Art Conference, GA2005, Milano, December 15-17, 2005”; C. Soddu Ed.; (Alea Design Publisher, Milano, 2005), pp. 265-276FRANCAVIGLIA, Mauro, LORENZI, Marcella Giulia, PETRY, Michael (2006) – “Robotic Superstrings: Making a Unique Generative Artwork from the Superstring Installations DVDs”, in: Proceedings of the “9th Generative Art Conference, GA2006, Milano, 13-15 December 2006”; C. Soddu Ed.; (Alea Design Publisher, Milano, 2006), Part 2, pp. 38-42FRANCAVIGLIA, Mauro, LORENZI, Marcella Giulia, PETRY, Michael (2007) – “Superstrings and Robotic Superstrings Installations: Generative Art & Science in Interaction to Produce A-life Artworks”, in: “Advances in Artificial Life”, Proceedings of the 9th European Conference ECAL 2007, Lisbon, Sept. 10-14, 2007; LNAI 4648, F. Almeida e Costa, L.M. Rocha, E. Costa, I. Harvey & A. Coutinho Eds.; Springer-Verlag (Berlin, 2007), pp. 505-514GALANTER Philip, www.philipgalanter.com/downloads/ga2003_paper.pdfGESAMTKUNSTWERKhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GesamtkunstwerkGREENE Brian (2000) - The Elegant Universe: Superstrings, Hidden Dimensions, and the Quest for the Ultimate Theory, Vintage Series, Random House Inc., UK, ISBN 978-0375708114GREENE Brian (2003) “Il futuro della teoria delle stringhe; una conversazione con Brian Greene”: Le Scienze 424 (Dicembre, 2003), pp. 44-49GRIFFITHS David J. (1987) - Introduction to Elementary Particles, John Wiley & Sons, New York (see also the web page: http://superstringtheory.com/)ISI “Art, Complexity and Technology: Their Interaction in Emergence”, Workshop held in Villa Gualino (ISI Foundation, Torino, Italy), 5-6 May, 2005 http://www.isi.it/conference-art.htmlL’UNIVERSE INVISIBLE http://universe2009.obspm.fr/LEABHART Thomas (2007), “Etienne Decroux” (Routledge Performance Practitioners), Routledge, London, UKLORENZI, Marcella Giulia, FRANCAVIGLIA, Mauro (2007) – “Painting with Light: Generative Artworks or “Setting in Motion” the Fourth Dimension”, in: Proceedings of the “10th Generative Art Conference, GA2007, Milano, 12-14 December 2007”; C. Soddu Ed.; (Alea Design Publisher, Milano, 2007), pp. 350-360 LORENZI Marcella Giulia, FATIBENE Lorenzo, FRANCAVIGLIA Mauro (2007) - Più Veloce della Luce: Visualizzare lo SpazioTempo relativistico, Centro Editoriale e librario dell’Università della Calabria, Cosenza, ISBN 88-7458-067-3, 80 pp. + DVD-Rom (in Italian and English).LORENZI, Marcella Giulia, FRANCAVIGLIA, Mauro (2009) – “Arte Digitale nella Comunicazione Scientifica”: Visible 5, 211-234 (2009) - Proceedings of the Conference “L’Immagine del Discorso Scientifico: Statuti e Dispositivi di Visualizzazione” - Urbino, Luglio 2007idivis/components/com_chronocontact/uploads/ChronoFormsArticle/20090630132824_URBIN-modified.pdfMcKEE Stuart, Can designers and scientists teach each other how to express new concepts in text and image?http://www.eyemagazine.com/feature.php?id=124&fid=549MINSKY Marvin (1999) - The future merging of science, art and psychology. In: Timothy Druckrey with Ars Electronica (edited by), Ars Electronica, Facing the Future, Cambridge, MA, USAMUSEO DEL CINEMA DI TORINOhttp://www.museocinema.it/museo.php?l=enPARTICLE OR STRINGS. THE UNIVERSE IS A BUZZ WITH ENERGYhttp://www.esof2010.org/scienceinthecity/62PERFORMANCE ARThttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Performance_art PEZIN Patrick (2003) - Étienne Decroux, mime corporel, Saint-Jean-de-Védas, L'Entretemps, coll. “Les Voies de l'acteur “QUANTUM MECHANICShttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mechanicsSCIENAR (Scientific Scenarios and Art)www.scienceandart.infoSIGRAV http://www.sigrav.org/Announcements/Cosenza2008/CommunicatingScience.htmlSNOW Charles Percy (1960) – The Two Cultures, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, ISBN 978-0521457309 pp. 181 (second edition; 1993 reissue)SUPERSTRING www.tinyurl.com/superstringTHEATRE DE L’ANGE FOU AND INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL OF CORPOREAL MIMEhttp://www.angefou.co.uk/background.htmlWAGNER Richard (1993) - tr. W. Ashton Ellis, The Art-Work of the Future and Other Works, Lincoln and London, ISBN 0803297521WILSON Stephen, (2002) - Information Arts. Intersections of art, science and technology, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA

i