Divergence and convergence in graphic design and communication design

Abstract

Academics have recently explored establishing two education networks in graphic design and communication design, one respectively in the UK and the other in Australia. However, although based on similar concerns, beliefs and aspirations, the two networks have assumed different names. For some, graphic design and communication design are interchangeable terms. For others, they mean different things. This may be confusing for some in a higher education sector that has continually evolved and expanded in recent decades. This 'conversation' session set out to explore the similarities and differences between graphic design and communication design. The formation of these networks was briefly outlined and delegates worked together to identify how various defining qualitiescompetencies, knowledge, skills, activities, functions-might differentiate between graphic design and communication design. The objective was to establish where there are converging and diverging interests, and where there needs to be further research into differentiation that challenges territorial assumptions about practice, theory, and history in graphic design and communication design.

Quantized Skyrmions from SU(4) weight diagrams

“…In the lightly-bound model, N short − 0.5 N long gives a good estimate for the binding energy of a cluster [19]. E bond works better in the standard Skyrme model except for some exceptional Skyrmions that have particularly visible clustering into B = 4 cubes and B = 3 tetrahedra, notably the B = 4 and B = 28 Skyrmions.…”