
Entropy in Social Networks [pdf] - espeed
https://www.cs.virginia.edu/~jlp/12.SOCINFO.pdf
======
SI_Rob
Fascinating paper. Seems to support the idea that social networks are just
another species of complex system, and as such tend to develop self-
reinforcing structures of influence according to an underlying set of
universal state-transfer properties, iterating over time and amplifying the
quantum effects governing atomic interactions between members of the ground
set of elements (people, at this scale), broadly similar to the way that
complex physical systems are all echoes of thermodynamics.

I wonder... will there be a periodic table of ecosystemic elements some day, a
Zuckerberg's standard model of quantum sociodynamics? /s

~~~
medymed
Also could suggest that by mandating periodic group-connection-reinforcing
rituals, like daily/weeky religious or other activity, that a society can
reach a connectivity state that's quite inflexible.

~~~
SI_Rob
Indeed, this is a function of monumentalism, which is to reify and consolidate
ritual into a pattern that is as permanent and immutable as humanly possible,
and thus make the physical landscape shared by a given community reflect the
mental landscape they likewise share.

~~~
nurettin
All that rhetoric is wasted on bored churchgoers.

------
lilfrost
I can't believe this is a published article. 3/4 of the paper is essentially
crackpottery (e.g. Proposition 5 proves that the composition of surjective
maps is surjective), while the final 1/4 is a "proof by picture" (see Figure
6) that you'd see from a mediocre undergraduate pset.

~~~
espeed
The figures ("pictures") aren't part of the proof, they're part of the
presentation, and Figure 6, as stated in the paper, is included as a reference
to an analogous work.

~~~
laqq3
If you read the last 1/4 of the paper, you'll see that Figure 6 is an integral
part of the discussion; furthermore, nothing in the discussion is proven
rigorously --- they all appeal to the picture.

That is exactly what a proof by picture is.

------
whatnotests
I know this is HN but can someone ELI-don't-have-a-PhD-in-mathematics?

~~~
alextheparrot
The math is tough to grok, but it appears they are using some set
constructions to show that given a certain cycle size (4 or more) within a
graph, those cycles are stable (Irreducible) based on some previous work.
Thus, network stability is contingent on those cycles and you can extend this
to say that the reason social networks don't dissolve is because these subsets
give stability to the graph?

~~~
M_Grey
Honestly, I've had easier times reading through representation theory
concerning quantum mechanics! I think I see what it's trying to say though,
which appears to be some mathematical basis for what we experience online;
communities form, fragment, and it's exceedingly difficult to halt or reverse
that process of fragmentation and isolation. Eventually, this trend results in
the decoherence of the network.

Is that about it?

------
supernumerary
Not sure this accounts for the fact that social networks, unlike galaxies or
the universe can be folded and reconstituted at will. If you think of it like
making a pizza, you spin the dough and as it spins it will eventually break
apart (mySpace, Tumblr, your-favorite-forum-of-yore) but you can always fold
it back over itself. In this metaphor, Facebook's introduction of new features
and its acquisition of Instagram, WhatsApp and forthcoming VR (in a way its
own universe, without any natural law like entropy) represent folding -
reconstitutions and renewals. I suppose we can conclude that if entropy
represents a fundamental part of natural law applicable to social networks,
our technology will try to negate and dominate it. At the very least and
assuming the thesis of the paper to hold true we can say, Social Networks are
doing something about it.

~~~
trhway
>without any natural law like entropy

whenever there is gradient between [energy] potentials the things would move
along it to neutralize the difference - that is the entropy law at work,
nothing happens without it. Folding back, reconstitution, renewal - it is all
requires expending energy, ie. entropy increase.

> if entropy represents a fundamental part of natural law applicable to social
> networks, our technology will try to negate and dominate it.

our technology is just a tool of ours. Being live organisms we follow the main
principle (stemming from the 2nd law) what the life is built upon - negating
and dominating entropy in some small volume of spacetime by using energy
obtained by increasing entropy in some other volume of spacetime by even
larger amount than the energy extracted and the entropy dominated/negated.
Technology just allows to amplify that process.

~~~
supernumerary
Hey thanks, this is an awesome reply and I appreciate it.

