When we create [landscapes] through a medium, it instantaneously loses its essence and becomes nothing but a representation and a fiction brought to reality.  Therefore, a true [landscape] can only exist in the realm of the ideal and could never be brought upon the realm of the being. [1]

Perception -> Product

As the machine's senses are different in that of a human, its perception is modulated by the translation of such perceived phenomena happening in the realm of reality into the realm of the virtual (sensing); and eventually re-applied back into reality to create a neo-incarnate.

The compounding process is as follows:

Reality -> Virtual -> Neo-Reality -> Virtual...

[1]  My interest in the development of this thesis originated from this theoretical passage I previously wrote, which can be applied to architecture or any discipline that explores the epistemology of the techne, and of ontology, specifically in relation to production (that is being further aided by technological advancements).  The overall question stems from my latent interests in the usual-dichotomous agents of the real and the virtual; the representation and the presentation; and of course, nature and the non-nature.  Within these dichotomies, I find myself interested in the deletion of the gap that divides such “opposition,” and the understanding of a morphological gradient between the two.  Specifically, within the topic of the thesis, the nature/non-nature divide is something I wanted to further explore within the context of technology (sp. sensing/responsive technologies).  This theoretical disorientation situates the assertion in the realm of the auteur theory —and eventually the question of autonomy.