> But I still think it is an interesting and
> non-trivial observation if the
> Gibbs distribution (which is not an obvious
> distribution in the first place)
> consistently models wealth distribution in diverse
> societies. The
> explanation for the "findings" provided by the
> authors could be ideological
> and yet the initial study could also be non-trivial.
>
>
> There isn't even a correlation;
> > there could not be, because an idealized gas is
> > neither a dependent nor an independent variable of
> a
> > wealth distribution. There is only, perhaps, the
> fact
> > that a wealth distribution exhibits certain
> > statistical properties also exhibited by ideal
> gases.
> > But statistical properties are similar in lots of
> > systems that have no relationship. Bell curves.
> > Bimodal distributions. Etc. You find them all over
> the
> > place.
>
>
>
> Nicely stated. And yes the Gibbs distribution is a
> statistical model, but
> not one I would expect to provide a model for wealth
> distribution.
>
>
>
>
> It is total nonsense to suggest that there is some
> > sort of social physics involved such that you are
> > explaining social phenomena in physical terms, or
> that
> > physical laws or models are somehow explanatorily
> > illuminating merely because you find, if you do,
> > common statistical properties in the idealized gas
> of
> > stat mech and in some econometric measure of
> wealth
> > distributions.
>
>
>
> Well, it is possible that complex social systems do
> act in ways similar to
> physical systems and that similar models can be
> applied to each. I wouldn't
> rule it out a priori.
>
> The abstract or quote from the research quote posted
> a
> > bit later makes this quite clear. In fact what
> these
> > guys have to offer is boring and conventional
> > bourgeois economic commonplaces about the rich
> being
> > richer because they are thriftier, which is false,
> > uninteresting, and has no connection whatsoever to
> any
> > part of physics.
> >
> > I'm actually open-minded about reductionism as a
> > program for psychological and social research. I
> wrote
> > a doctoral dissertation and a number of papers
> > defending the possibility before I got bored with
> the
> > subject. This is the sort of claptrap, however,
> that
> > gives reductionism a bad name. If there's nothing
> more
> > useful to be said about physical bases for
> phenomena
> > like the distribution of wealth than this, best to
> > give it up for a bad job. As far as reductionist
> > programs go, sociobiology is far more promising.
> (And
> > yes, I think there's something to sociobiology.)
> > Properly framed it is at least coherent, possible,
> and
> > potentially explanatory. This stuff is just dreck.
>
>
>
>
>
> --- Jerry Monaco <monacojerry at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On 4/24/07, andie nachgeborenen
> > > <andie_nachgeborenen at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The idea that income
> > > > distributions obey the laws of classical
> > > statistical
> > > > mechanics is ludicrous. In any event, there
> are
> > > far
> > > > more useful and comprehensible explanations in
> > > terms
> > > > of the behavior of capitalist markets and
> power
> > > > politics.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > Yes, well this is exactly my knee jerk reaction.
> > >
> > > But take the study on its own terms and assume
> for a
> > > moment that you
> > > view the evidence in the most favorable light
> > > against the party whom
> > > you just delivered summary judgment against
> assuming
> > > that all the
> > > facts as presented by the researcher are
> established
> > > and drawing all
> > > reasonable references from those facts.
> Starting
> > > from here the
> > > evidence is that wealth distribution can be
> found to
> > > obey the models
> > > of statistical mechanics and specifically the
> model
> > > of the Gibbs
> > > distribution at least in Japan, the U.S., the
> U.K.,
> > > India, and 19th
> > > century Europe. If this is so even for a few
> > > societies and for a
> > > limited amount of time, what does this say about
> the
> > > structure of
> > > human societies and/or power distribution within
> > > human societies?
> > > This is the limited question.
> > >
> > > It is possible that it is a coincidence that the
> > > Gibbs distribution
> > > and wealth distribution correlate, but even so
> it is
> > > a strange
> > > correlation even for a few societies.
> > >
> > > But a bigger _if_.... If it is so also true for
> > > societies that don't
> > > have market systems what would this say about
> the
> > > structure of complex
> > > societies in general? (Maybe you should leave
> out
> > > my "bigger" ifs....
> > > )
> > >
> > > Jerry
> > > ___________________________________
>
=== message truncated ===
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com