Daylight Simulation and Phenomenological Interpretation in Sacred Built Environments: A Climate–Based Modeling Approach

The research was supported by a complex analytical approach, which was rooted in connecting the theoretical deduction with the advanced digital simulation. The analytical and simulation work was broken down into three successive phases to compare architectural light patterns with literature-derived cognitive interpretations:

The first stage: Building the analytical matrix and deriving cognitive criteria based on phenomenological studies and architectural neuroscience. Focusing on parameters like contrast, light fragmentation, and visual silence, and translating these parameters to key performance indicators (KPIs) that describe the simulated light distribution; associations with awe and tranquility remain qualitative hypotheses.

The second stage: Digital modeling and climate simulation (CBDM). The algorithms of the Ladybug Tools were used to simulate the daylight distributions; these were processed within the Grasshopper environment [5] and were used to simulate the interaction with light and materials.

Measurements: The following two point-in-time illuminance (lux) values at the two solstice benchmarks are used in the workflow. These snapshots do not produce the results of daylight autonomy (DA), spatial daylight autonomy (sDA), and useful daylight illuminance (UDI), which involve a time series [6, 7]. These tables are descriptive tables based on instantaneous illuminance bands (<200, 200-2000, >2000 lux) rather than UDI for the year or validated comfort limits. Spatial contrast is calculated as R = E_max/E_min, where Emin is positive and on the same sensor grid at the same hour. The ratios are only determinable from the extrema of the underlying grid and are not given by colour maps. If the value of E_min is zero, the ratio becomes undefined and should not be reported as a finite value.

The simulation method: The tests were conducted at two time points: June 21, the summer solstice, at 12:00 pm at the Bait Ur Rouf Mosque (midday worship, Dhaka) and December 21, the winter solstice, at 11:00 am at the Church of the Light (morning worship, Osaka). These hours are to be used for worship time assumptions in the two buildings; solstice dates are seasonal benchmarks – not always Sundays. Multi–hour and multi–season data should be included in future studies to have a more comprehensive dynamic picture.

The third stage: Results analysis and connections (data integration). Digital data extracted from Ladybug was analyzed with the criteria of the cognitive matrix, exploring whether spatial light patterns could be interpreted in terms of attention or perceived calm; high illuminance alone does not establish contrast or a cognitive response.

Based on the cognitive intersection between the phenomenological propositions and the neuroarchitectural literature reviewed in the theoretical framework, the research deduces an 'integrated analytical matrix' (Table 1). This matrix aims to transform the physical elements of light into proposed perceptual indicators that can be qualitatively interpreted in sacred spaces, to explore how 'light matter' is transformed into 'existential experience'.

The five analytical axes in Table 1 were derived inductively from three bodies of literature: (1) phenomenological accounts of place and atmosphere [8, 9, 11]; (2) neuroarchitecture and embodied experience [12, 15]; and (3) daylight assessment [6, 7]. The awe and tranquility categories are interpretive descriptions rather than neurological diagnoses. No verified contrast threshold or illuminance range is used to predict amygdala activity, attention restoration, or a specific emotion. Judgements are qualitative readings of architectural strategies and simulation images, not statistically validated scores.

Through the proposed analytical matrix, the research analyzes two universal models for the perceptual employment of light.

Table 1. Matrix of comparative analysis of strategies for dealing with natural light between the church and mosque spaces

4.1 Model of the Church of the Light–Tadao Ando

This church offers a case for a neuroarchitectural interpretation. Ando emphasizes spatial presence by relying on the strategy of "sensory deprivation". Frampton identifies this as a tectonic strategy in which the raw materiality of concrete and the precise control of light openings fuse to produce what he terms "the poetics of construction" [19]. Perceptual analysis: the contrast between concrete and the cruciform opening creates a prominent visual focus [20]. Its potential to guide attention is an interpretation, not a measured top-down or bottom-up neural response. Embodied perception: the light cleft may orient the body towards the altar and act as a focal point; any effect on meditation or brain activity requires direct testing [15].

4.2 Bait Ur Rouf Mosque model–Marina Tabassum

The mosque is another solution using "temporal dynamics" and light scattering. The later mosque is not documented in Curtis [21] who offers a more general historical context in which to compare and assess contemporary architecture in relation to place, materials, and climate. Holl [2] similarly argues that the phenomenological anchoring of light to a specific site and programme distinguishes architecture of presence from mere building. Temporal interpretation: roof openings and light courts distribute daylight within the prayer hall [22]. Moving light patterns may make the passage of time perceptible; circadian effects were not measured. Tactile phenomenology: the interaction of light with brick texture may support a haptic interpretation of spatial containment [9]; mirror-neuron activity and physical warmth cannot be inferred from the images.

4.3 Comparative analytical matrix (inductive results)

While Tadao Ando emphasizes the 'sharp directing of attention' through a concentrated visual focus, Marina Tabassum tends to 'distribute perception' and correlate it with cosmic time, suggesting a possible experience of distributed attention. Both are interpreted as using light to shape spiritual experience, but from different perceptual entrances (awe vs. tranquility). These interpretive patterns are identified in two polar–opposite cases, both designed by internationally renowned architects, and should therefore be treated as hypotheses for future multi–case testing rather than as a generalisable, predictive framework.

The five axes in Table 1 provide a qualitative coding framework. Spatial gradient describes changes along the approach path; orientation describes the position of localized light foci; temporality compares the two solstice patterns; atmosphere describes the distribution of light and shadow; and containment considers material character. Figures 1–4 show interior views (A), false-colour views (B), and plan distributions (C). Quantitative path gradients, area fractions, and contrast ratios require the raw sensor-grid outputs and are not reconstructed from the images. A maximum-to-minimum ratio must be written as R = E_max/E_min (for example, 100:1, not 1:100, when the maximum is one hundred times the minimum). No validated 100:1 threshold for awe is asserted. The cool/warm material associations refer to an interpretation of concrete and brick, not to the colours of the lux legend, which do not represent colour temperature or thermal sensation.

1.png

2.png

3.png

4.png

4.4 Digital simulation (ladybug analysis)

4.4.1 Quantitative (digital) and qualitative (perceptual) measurement methodology

This study is based on a binary methodology that combines the qualitative analytical matrix and quantitative numerical simulation using Ladybug Tools within the Grasshopper environment. The simulation was performed at two temporal benchmarks (summer and winter solstices) to compare seasonal daylight patterns [23]; nervous-system effects were not measured. The distinction between instantaneous and time-based daylight assessment is informed by the daylight-metrics literature [7, 24]. The analytical quantities are: (1) point–in–time illuminance (lux), recorded directly across the sensor grid at the fixed observation hour (11:00 for the Church of the Light, 12:00 for Bait Ur Rouf Mosque), and (2) the spatial contrast ratio, calculated as the ratio of the maximum to the minimum lux value recorded on the same sensor grid at that hour, which operationalises the degree of light/shadow contrast referenced throughout the analytical Matrix. Both quantities can be derived from single-hour grid outputs without annual occupancy weighting. Only qualitative contrast is preserved here, until the actual maximum and minimum illuminances are verified. Weather files: EnergyPlus EPW for Osaka, Japan (Church of the Light) and for Dhaka, Bangladesh (Bait Ur Rouf Mosque); Sky model: Perez All–Weather Sky (Church of the Light) and (Bait Ur Rouf Mosque); Surface reflectivity: Concrete 0.35; Brick 0.45; Floor 0.20; Glazing visible transmittance (VT): 0.6 (Church of the Light) and 0.6 (Bait Ur Rouf Mosque); Sensor grids: 0.75 m above ground level, spacing 0.45 × 0.45 m (Church of the Light) and 0.35 m above floor, spacing 0.50 × 0.50 m (Bait Ur Rouf Mosque).

4.4.2 Analysis of the Church of the Light (Tadao Ando): Strategy of contrast and awe

The sensor grid is 1.00 m high above the ground and 0.45 m apart.

First: Digital analysis: Lower-illuminated areas and localized higher-illuminated areas are seen in the summer and winter maps. The interior reference view, the false-colour view, and the plan distribution are shown in Figures 1(A–C) and Figures 2(A–C), respectively. Snapshots were summarized in Table 2a and Table 2b, and the spatial patterns of the snapshots are compared in Table 2c. The displayed plan legends are bounded, and extrema, as currently stated in the original claims, such as 0–20 lux, 20–200 lux, and >2000 lux, must be verified from the raw grid.

Second: Lighting maps analysis (lux analysis): The colour maps display both lower and higher light and dark bands. It is important to note that the proportion of the floor in each band cannot be determined visually, and neither can a sensory response be determined from a visual inspection; it must be read against each panel's legend.

A–Summer season: Simulation features bright spots in the dark background at June 21 (Figures 1(B) and 1(C)). A spatial pattern is seen as a focused visual presentation. The solar altitude at the actual 11:00 simulation timestamp requires confirmation; it must not be replaced by a solar-noon value. No illuminance threshold for awe is inferred.

Table 2a. Results of the summer analysis–Church of the Light

Table 2b. Results of the winter analysis–Church of the Light

Table 2c. Comparison of summer and winter analysis–Church of the Light

B–Winter season: At the winter solstice, the sun follows a lower seasonal path. Figures 2(B) and 2(C) show a changed light distribution; the solar altitude and penetration depth require verification at the actual simulation timestamp. The winter pattern is interpreted qualitatively as another concentrated visual focus.

Third: Cognitive interpretation: Transitions between lower and higher illuminance bands are interpreted as giving light a dramatic role. This digital behaviour illustrates the research hypothesis that the Church of the Light relies on 'acute central attention' to achieve spiritual transcendence.

Fourth: Neuro-interpretation: A concentrated light focus may be interpreted as an attentional cue. The present simulation cannot establish amygdala activation, inhibition of the default mode network (DMN), or reduced mind-wandering. These are possible topics for future occupant research, not observed effects of the modelled contrast.

4.4.3 Analysis of the Bait Ur Rouf Mosque–Marina Tabassum (fragmentation and tranquility strategy)

First: digital analysis: The simulation shows multiple localized bright zones associated with the openings. Figures 3(A–C) and 4(A–C) show the interior views, false-colour views, and plan distributions, respectively. Tables 3a and 3b summarize the summer and winter snapshots, and Table 3c compares them. The summer plan includes intermediate bands, whereas the winter plan shows an extensive lower-illuminance central region; uniform 200–500 lux conditions across both seasons are not supported by these maps.

Summer season: At the June 21, 12:00 benchmark, the summer plan contains several localized bright regions. The upper holes appear as multiple and small (multifocal) light foci, represented by higher bands in the false-colour display. These display colours encode illuminance, not physical colour temperature; the image does not prove that shadows or glare are absent.

Winter season: At the December 21, 12:00 benchmark, brighter regions remain near the perimeter while the central region is darker. Exact solar altitude and the contribution of reflected light require verification from the simulation settings. The Ladybug map shows smooth colour gradients on the brick walls, which can inform a qualitative reading of material and light.

Second: Cognitive interpretation: Multiple light sources may suggest distributed attention, but the seasonal maps are not uniformly illuminated. Tranquility is proposed as a phenomenological interpretation; mental relaxation and processing effort were not measured.

Third: Neuro-interpretation: The fragmented light pattern may be interpreted through ART [16]. That theory does not establish that the modelled mosque reduces cortisol or releases particular hormones. Neither physiological stress nor cognitive load was measured, and the winter map does not support uniform illumination throughout the hall. Tranquility remains a hypothesis for a future occupant study.

Table 3a. Results of the summer analysis–Bait Ur Rouf Mosque

Table 3b. Results of the winter analysis–Bait Ur Rouf Mosque

Table 3c. Comparison of summer and winter analysis–Bait Ur Rouf Mosque