Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

Sociology Can the six degrees of separation be disproved?

views
     
TSBeastboy
post May 7 2010, 10:14 AM, updated 16y ago

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
242 posts

Joined: Nov 2009


Do you believe in the six degrees of separation?

The theory is that 2 people are only 6 steps or less away from each other via a friend-of-a-friend chain.

To prove that Justin Bieber or Miley Cyrus or David Beckham are just 6 friend away from you, you just have to find a friend who knows someone who knows someone, 6 times or less, until they reach one of these celebrities. Using the same way, you can also prove a personal connection to anyone from a Papua New Guinea tribesman to Queen Elizabeth.

What I am interested in is whether anyone can think of a case to disprove this theory of six degrees. Anyone?


TSBeastboy
post May 7 2010, 12:34 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
242 posts

Joined: Nov 2009


QUOTE(abubin @ May 7 2010, 12:27 PM)
Why six but not five or seven?

Where is the studies for this theory?
*
Actually some say 5. The theory originated by Frigyes Karinthy in 1929. In 1961 another guy called Michael Gurevich did a detailed study of it in his phD paper.

You can google it up for more info.


TSBeastboy
post May 7 2010, 01:28 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
242 posts

Joined: Nov 2009


QUOTE(CyberTron88 @ May 7 2010, 01:18 PM)
some remote aborigines with limited access to "outside world" also can be connected to some celebrities in 6 steps too?
*
Why not?

1. The aborigine has a friend in a nearby village.
2. That friend has a relative who works in town.
3. The relative has a boss whose cousin studies in Australia.
4. The cousin has a facebook fren in America.
5. The facebook fren has a sister who works as a talent agent in entertainment line.
6. The sister knows Justin Bieber in person.


TSBeastboy
post May 7 2010, 01:45 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
242 posts

Joined: Nov 2009


QUOTE(abubin @ May 7 2010, 01:33 PM)
it's all based on probability

1) the aborigine has a friend who has only one friend (that aborigine)
2) end of story
*
You missed out one line. That one friend has no other friends, acquaintances or family member that knows any other people.


Added on May 7, 2010, 2:01 pm
QUOTE(robertngo @ May 7 2010, 01:14 PM)
first you need to prove the six degree of seperation is true.
*
But if its already proven true, it removes any reason to prove it false right? A proven constant cannot carry two values.

Anyway I tested the theory on myself. Not the most scientific I know but it seems to hold water, mostly within 5 degrees. I'm just trying to think of a scenario that can poke a hole in that theory.


This post has been edited by Beastboy: May 7 2010, 02:01 PM
TSBeastboy
post May 7 2010, 02:48 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
242 posts

Joined: Nov 2009


QUOTE(CleverDick @ May 7 2010, 02:41 PM)
no,it has to be falsifiable if it falls under science,even if a statement is proven to be true,you still have to formulate a condition in which the proven statement can be shown false...
*
Hmmm... can u give an example?

I can't wrap my mind around a scenario where I have 5 fingers (proven true) and a condition in which that statement can be shown false.


TSBeastboy
post May 7 2010, 04:26 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
242 posts

Joined: Nov 2009


QUOTE(CleverDick @ May 7 2010, 02:54 PM)
e.g all swans are white,this is a falsifiable statement,its validity will be immediately rendered ineffective once a swan of different color is discovered...
*
True, but the all swans are white proposition would immediately attract the hasty generalization fallacy wouldn't it, just on the point that its a generalization. How it applies to the proposition there are 5 fingers on my hand I don't know, as its not a generalization but a specific physical manifestation. I wouldn't know how to disprove that I have 5 fingers.

QUOTE(CleverDick @ May 7 2010, 02:54 PM)
if you cannot show under which circumstance a statement can be disproved,then it's not science,try looking at all of the scientific laws and theories,they all share the same property,i.e they are falsifiable,you can prove them wrong if counter evidence are found,though they're accepted as facts by scientists...
and note that science does not deal with absolute certainty,it changes with the discovery of new evidence...
*
We're in agreement then. I am trying to disprove the six degrees theory by trying to find one scenario that proves it false. Since the number 6 was an outcome of some guy's statistical analysis (I think), one can refute with an alternative analysis, maybe by checking if the sample size, sample choice or margin of error had led to a faulty conclusion. But we don't have the data so its much easier to just ask if anyone had seen a real black swan and prove the proposition false.


TSBeastboy
post May 7 2010, 04:37 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
242 posts

Joined: Nov 2009


QUOTE(Vagrant @ May 7 2010, 02:49 PM)
If it takes 6 degree to connect a nobody to a celebrity, would you say it takes 12 degree to connect a nobody to a nobody?
*
Without a real study, you guess is as good as mine.

Anyway it was probably a question like yours that led the original theory to come up with the number 6. If I was doing that study, I would definitely have taken the nobodies into account.


TSBeastboy
post May 7 2010, 04:47 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
242 posts

Joined: Nov 2009


QUOTE(alanyuppie @ May 7 2010, 04:32 PM)
By starting a topic to ask for a disprovement experience/fact here would be a bit of a oxymoronic.

Those who participated in LYN webforum, most probably are well-connected via the internet social networking. Hence they are "unsuited" to be the 1st degree. But there might be  chance they KNOW someone who are ultra-isolated, making that particular individual as 1st degree, and them as 2nd degree.  Maybe there's a tiny chance you'll get what you wanted there smile.gif
*
Imagine it this way. Someone wrote a PhD thesis that claim all swans are white and becoz u have some doubt about it, you go to a forum like LYN and ask does anyone here know anyone who has ever seen a black swan? Not sure which part of that is oxymoronic.

Definitely no one in LYN is isolated, I agree. I wasn't asking for a real live case anyway. I was asking if you can imagine one scenario where this can be logically disproved. A thought experiment if you will.


TSBeastboy
post May 7 2010, 06:10 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
242 posts

Joined: Nov 2009


QUOTE(Vagrant @ May 7 2010, 05:08 PM)
So for a start, here are the case:

1. A 12 year old kid, home schooled, from North Korea. no access to internet.
2. The father of the 12 year old kid, Lighthouse keeper, hereby called as A
3. The employer of A
4.-------
5. The employer of B
6. The father of the 11 year old kid, sewage cleaner, hereby called as B
7. An 11 year old kid, home schooled, from Liberia, no money for internet.
The connection here, is on the assumption that the connection is best and least through the outside world by going through their father and the employer of their father.  Now try connect employer A and employer B, you have to make assumption that all possible of employer A (for lighthouse keeper in north korea and their respective employer) must know employer B ( for all the employer of all sewage cleaner in Liberia)

I choose lighthouse keeper and sewage cleaner as a demonstration of  the nature of their work, you could replace it with any work that requires a huge amount of time separated from the society.
*
As with any thought experiment, our imagination is the limit so I will try to give you a best case scenario to connect #3 to #5.

Lighthouse operators are usually connected to the shipping business. They provide coastal guideposts for ships.

Liberia is also connected with ships. It maintains a popluar maritime registry where it makes money.

There is a possible intersection point. #3 may at one time met #5 when he delivered oil to Pyongyang on a Liberian registered tanker. People connected to the same industry do cross paths. They may have met on shore break. #5 may have quit the shipping, went into self employment where he hired B.

So point #4 can happen under those circumstances.


TSBeastboy
post May 7 2010, 09:35 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
242 posts

Joined: Nov 2009


I think the scenario you give might have endless permutations. Even no phone or internet won't prevent the A & B from crossing paths by other means, like on foot under the most weird coincidences. They still got refugees coming from North Korea, Liberia and other isolated countries who might meet, of all places, in New York City. Any number of them could start talking about the people in your scenario, maybe a friend or relative they left behind. Remote chance yes but not impossible.

I think a broken link is only possible if the two individuals A & B are completely isolated from birth, from each other and other humans, including from its own parents.

Example, a baby that is born in the jungle with no witnesses around and is immediately abandoned at birth. When the parents die, its one and only link to the outside world is broken. Nobody knew it was born, nobody knew it exist. As long as it doesn't meet anyone after that, it is truly alone.

If there is such a person alive, then we have proof that one black swan exist.


TSBeastboy
post May 7 2010, 10:33 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
242 posts

Joined: Nov 2009


QUOTE(Vagrant @ May 7 2010, 09:52 PM)
If it is defined by friend to a friend chaining, you need not have so much of a permutations. You can start connecting to the North Korean boy right now through your friends.
*
I can actually give you one example close to it. I know someone, for real, who's employed by the American INS (immigration & naturalization service). A relative who works in the section that handles refugees becoz of his ability to speak Chinese. He has handled defectors from China and N Korea. They tell him sad stories of the relatives and friends they left behind.

So I know my relative by name, he knows his refugees by name, and the refugees know the isolated children in some N Korean or Chinese village by name. There's only 3 hops between me and some kid in the isolated village.

Actually using the same method, I've tested the theory by drawing some personal mapping to some people on the planet. 5 hops to Obama, 4 hops to a woman living in the German Alps, 3 hops to one family in Heilongjiang where there's no internet, and 3 hops to an Israeli engineer residing in Israel, a country where Malaysia has no diplomatic relationship.

Yes this is a friend of a friend chain. Real friend, not facebook friend or a casual stranger overheard in the street. Everyone in the chain knows the connecting friend by name.



This post has been edited by Beastboy: May 7 2010, 10:35 PM
TSBeastboy
post May 8 2010, 01:31 AM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
242 posts

Joined: Nov 2009


QUOTE(Vagrant @ May 7 2010, 10:49 PM)
Not quite my friend, this is likely the fallacy of the shortest chain. For the clause to be plausible, the longest chain must not be more than 6 degree. that said, you manage to establish it within 4 chain, but not quite for your niece or your nephew, which then adds another chain and makes it five.
*
The theory is based on the idea that everyone is at most six steps away from any other person on Earth, meaning if its less than 6 the theory still holds. The challenge is to find one example that is more than 6, or one that has zero.

QUOTE(Vagrant @ May 7 2010, 10:49 PM)
The perception that you manage to chain up one group does not hold true to chain up the whole nation...
*
True. I was just modeling my own case to test the hypothesis and not intending to generalize it to every North Korean.




This post has been edited by Beastboy: May 8 2010, 01:57 AM
TSBeastboy
post May 8 2010, 10:20 AM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
242 posts

Joined: Nov 2009


QUOTE(Vagrant @ May 8 2010, 09:47 AM)
Consider this, you have 5 chain to Obama, that makes it six from you to obama's relative, or his daughter.
How about when you have a son, what are your son's chain?
my best chance to connect to obama is through you, as i hardly know anyone else.
The result, my chain to Sasha obama or obama's relative is 7. It does not end here, I haven't consider my relatives yet, some of whom are toddler now.
*
You have a good point there. Why didn't think of that. Thanks! rclxms.gif

TSBeastboy
post May 8 2010, 04:03 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
242 posts

Joined: Nov 2009


QUOTE(alanyuppie @ May 8 2010, 12:02 PM)
You're overtaxing your brain. You seem like discussing for the sake of discussing. zero degree? what do you actually mean by zero degree
? Are you trying to prolong the discussion by introducing extra element which actually doesn't fit in?

between a human and another related human.. already 1 degree-chaining. What is your understanding of "zero degree" in this context? a human and his own soul ? a human vs his alter ego? a angel side of human vs his devil side?
*
Please refrain from making personal attacks in this thread.

From LYN forum rules:
Do not troll or flame. Do not intentionally post inflammatory message.


TSBeastboy
post May 19 2010, 01:36 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
242 posts

Joined: Nov 2009


That sounds like a reasonable idea, sparda.

Of course, the exception would be the outliers... the hermits as you say. We were looking for that proverbial black swan that would invalidate the hypothesis.

p/s you got mascara running down your nose (yr avatar) but you probably knew that already. biggrin.gif



 

Change to:
| Lo-Fi Version
0.0209sec    0.59    6 queries    GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 29th November 2025 - 05:18 PM