In the first part of the episode the commentator is explaining that NYC with a population of so much.... people is bound to have some lives that are connected... (this made me think: why is NYC special? Couldn't the same happen anywhere else?). The intriguing part about the first episode --- that's it very uninterested and kind of looking for an identity that only took place at the end. I will watch next episode because I did not get any good feelings about this one.
ABC has "Six Degrees" or "Zero Degrees"
- Thread starter Sean Mota
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 19
- Views 4K
New York is not; it is just bigger, so the odds increase. But the show could be focused on any large or even medium-sized city.
I haven't watched the show yet, but I have studied and taught about social network theory. the "six degrees of separation" argument is somewhat based on random graph theory.
say six people each know 50 other people.
1 degree separation = 50 People
2 “ “ 50X50=2500
3 “ “ 50X50X50=125,000
4 “ “ 50X50X50X50=6,250,000
5 “ “ 50X50X50X50X50=312,500,000
6 “ “ 50X50X50X50X50X50=15,625,000,000
Obviously, this is more than six billion, so in theory it makes sense…but wait, what is wrong with our logic? Random graphs pay no attention to the physical proximity or similarity of the habits of the people involved. As a result, people who live on the same street are no more likely to be acquainted than eskimos and aborigines! In fact you would have more acquaintances in Russia than in your own town.
The point is.. People are not randomly wired up around the world. Therefore, the “clustering” of our social connections destroys the calculations we made for the random graph. Random universe does not support connectors
Each of you may know 50 people, and each of those 50 people may know an additional 50 people, but they probably won’t know 50 different people. There will be many overlaps and repeats and in fact, our social network will not grow as fast as our calculations indicated they would.
There has to be connections or "bridges" that tie networks together. For example, Joe has eight friends; and Sue has 12 friends. Joe doesn't know Sue. But Joe knows Sam, and Sue knows Sam. There is a connection linking the two (rather small) networks together. Sue is a "connector" in between the network.
Some connectors have LOTS of links; they are "well connected." For example, I don't know Charlie Egren. But I know Scott Grezckowski, and Scott knows Charlie. In fact, Scott knows LOTS of people in the satellite industry that I don't know. He would be would Malcom Gladwell would call a "maven." Or what we might call a "super node." I have my small network, which is connected into much larger networks. (Gladwell's book THE TIPPING POINT provides a good lay-person, non-scientific introduction to the concept of small worlds networks, but Duncan Watts book SIX DEGREES provides a much better, although far more academic one).
Or perhaps a better example. The internet: Millions (maybe billions) of computers connected through a TCP/IP network. Are all connections on the Internet the same? Of course not. My personal website gets a REALLY small amount of hits. But SatelliteGuys gets 40 million hits a month. It is a much bigger NODE on the network. Yet SatGuys is still small potatoes compared to Amazon.com or Google.com or Microsoft.com. Those are really big mavens.
Ok, I am going on an on. But one last thought. The term "six degrees" was popularized by the "Kevin Bacon game." Some college students came up with a game to see how connected the actor Kevin Bacon was within Hollywood. They found that almost every actor was within "six degrees" of separation from Kevin Bacon. For example. Patrick Stewart has a "Bacon number" of 2.
Patrick Stewart was in Let It Be Me (1995) with Campbell Scott (I)
Campbell Scott was in Loverboy (2005) with Kevin Bacon
Here's another: rosemarie dewitt has a Bacon number of 2.
Rosemarie DeWitt was in Cinderella Man (2005) with Beau Starr
Beau Starr was in Where the Truth Lies (2005) with Kevin Bacon.
The problem with the logic under the game, is that is assumes that there is something special about Kevin Bacon. There isn't. The reality is the entire network of actors is a really small group of people, and they are almost all highly related.
But I'll end with my personal favorite: I study Jun Fan Jeet Kune do under Troy Miller. Troy Miller studied it under Dan Innosanto. Dan studied under Bruce Lee. Therefore I am just two degrees of separation from Guro Dan Innosanto, and a mere three from Bruce Lee. Dang, I must be good.
EDIT: Play the Bacon game yourself - at http://oracleofbacon.org/ See how many actors are beyond 2 or 3 degrees from Bacon.
I haven't watched the show yet, but I have studied and taught about social network theory. the "six degrees of separation" argument is somewhat based on random graph theory.
say six people each know 50 other people.
1 degree separation = 50 People
2 “ “ 50X50=2500
3 “ “ 50X50X50=125,000
4 “ “ 50X50X50X50=6,250,000
5 “ “ 50X50X50X50X50=312,500,000
6 “ “ 50X50X50X50X50X50=15,625,000,000
Obviously, this is more than six billion, so in theory it makes sense…but wait, what is wrong with our logic? Random graphs pay no attention to the physical proximity or similarity of the habits of the people involved. As a result, people who live on the same street are no more likely to be acquainted than eskimos and aborigines! In fact you would have more acquaintances in Russia than in your own town.
The point is.. People are not randomly wired up around the world. Therefore, the “clustering” of our social connections destroys the calculations we made for the random graph. Random universe does not support connectors
Each of you may know 50 people, and each of those 50 people may know an additional 50 people, but they probably won’t know 50 different people. There will be many overlaps and repeats and in fact, our social network will not grow as fast as our calculations indicated they would.
There has to be connections or "bridges" that tie networks together. For example, Joe has eight friends; and Sue has 12 friends. Joe doesn't know Sue. But Joe knows Sam, and Sue knows Sam. There is a connection linking the two (rather small) networks together. Sue is a "connector" in between the network.
Some connectors have LOTS of links; they are "well connected." For example, I don't know Charlie Egren. But I know Scott Grezckowski, and Scott knows Charlie. In fact, Scott knows LOTS of people in the satellite industry that I don't know. He would be would Malcom Gladwell would call a "maven." Or what we might call a "super node." I have my small network, which is connected into much larger networks. (Gladwell's book THE TIPPING POINT provides a good lay-person, non-scientific introduction to the concept of small worlds networks, but Duncan Watts book SIX DEGREES provides a much better, although far more academic one).
Or perhaps a better example. The internet: Millions (maybe billions) of computers connected through a TCP/IP network. Are all connections on the Internet the same? Of course not. My personal website gets a REALLY small amount of hits. But SatelliteGuys gets 40 million hits a month. It is a much bigger NODE on the network. Yet SatGuys is still small potatoes compared to Amazon.com or Google.com or Microsoft.com. Those are really big mavens.
Ok, I am going on an on. But one last thought. The term "six degrees" was popularized by the "Kevin Bacon game." Some college students came up with a game to see how connected the actor Kevin Bacon was within Hollywood. They found that almost every actor was within "six degrees" of separation from Kevin Bacon. For example. Patrick Stewart has a "Bacon number" of 2.
Patrick Stewart was in Let It Be Me (1995) with Campbell Scott (I)
Campbell Scott was in Loverboy (2005) with Kevin Bacon
Here's another: rosemarie dewitt has a Bacon number of 2.
Rosemarie DeWitt was in Cinderella Man (2005) with Beau Starr
Beau Starr was in Where the Truth Lies (2005) with Kevin Bacon.
The problem with the logic under the game, is that is assumes that there is something special about Kevin Bacon. There isn't. The reality is the entire network of actors is a really small group of people, and they are almost all highly related.
But I'll end with my personal favorite: I study Jun Fan Jeet Kune do under Troy Miller. Troy Miller studied it under Dan Innosanto. Dan studied under Bruce Lee. Therefore I am just two degrees of separation from Guro Dan Innosanto, and a mere three from Bruce Lee. Dang, I must be good.
EDIT: Play the Bacon game yourself - at http://oracleofbacon.org/ See how many actors are beyond 2 or 3 degrees from Bacon.
Last edited:
The problem about is that statiscally social-economic distribution plays a big roll on whom I know and whom you know. Our circle or acquaintaces and friends are pretty much determined by social-economics forces most of the time. Unless you happen to be rich and try to socialize with the poor which maybe the case but not the absolute. What's the likelyhood that I will ever meet President GWB. I think I am about three zillion of degrees from him.
Is there a theoretical mathematical hypothesis about this? If it is all subjective it is hard to believe. However, network topology is based on mathematical theory.
Is there a theoretical mathematical hypothesis about this? If it is all subjective it is hard to believe. However, network topology is based on mathematical theory.
Sean Mota said:
I doubt you are that many degrees of separation from GWB. For example, I know my former congressman, who knows GWB, just two degrees of separation. THUS, its just thee degrees to pretty much any world leader that GWB knows.
BUT, the thing that the small world theory misses is the fact that just because I KNOW my former Congressman, does not mean that I could use that connection in any meaningful way to reach GWB. Let alone anyone he knows.
BTW, another good book, more focused on graph theory is LINKED by Albert-Laszlo Barabasi; it has more of the math.
Its all interesting stuff though. I plan to watch the show tonight to see if its any good.
I finally saw the show. It was interesting.
But the claim at the end that everyone in the world is connected by no more than six people is not, I don't think, well illustrated by the show. Lets see... Carlos gets Mae off for public indecency (too bad this wasn't on HBO ); he falls in love with her. Mae gets a job as a nanny for a woman who becomes friends with the ad executive. The ad executive finds a washed up photographer, who starts taking pictures again, and its a picture of the grieving woman (who hired Mae). Carlos befriends a limo driver who is re-entering the world of crime, and who gets a photo of Mae, a supposed runaway..... Carlos and his friend see a guy (ad exec's fiancee) making out with another woman....
Yeah, those connections are cool, but not quite "six degrees" of separation.
All that said, I think the show might have potential just to see how far the writers can tangle the webs.
But the claim at the end that everyone in the world is connected by no more than six people is not, I don't think, well illustrated by the show. Lets see... Carlos gets Mae off for public indecency (too bad this wasn't on HBO
); he falls in love with her. Mae gets a job as a nanny for a woman who becomes friends with the ad executive. The ad executive finds a washed up photographer, who starts taking pictures again, and its a picture of the grieving woman (who hired Mae). Carlos befriends a limo driver who is re-entering the world of crime, and who gets a photo of Mae, a supposed runaway..... Carlos and his friend see a guy (ad exec's fiancee) making out with another woman....Yeah, those connections are cool, but not quite "six degrees" of separation.
All that said, I think the show might have potential just to see how far the writers can tangle the webs.
Second episode was dull until the last 10-15 minutes. Will watch next episode but I am about to drop it.
yep, the only thing so far is wtf is in Mae's box (laff, ok, no pun intended). If it's so damn important put it in a safe deposit box or something. Two keys to open a wooden box? If whoever is after her is so dangerous she has to run, two locks on a wooden box is not gonna stop them.
I didn't mind the second episode, but the notion of these connections is really a bit much. Carlos gets the case involving Damien's shooting. Come on...
Six Degrees is on HIATUS until January. According to the Futon Critic.
Its slot has been given to Men in Trees. So, if Six Degrees comes back, it will probably need another slot.
Its slot has been given to Men in Trees. So, if Six Degrees comes back, it will probably need another slot.
Six Degrees Returns on March 23
ABC has announced that "Six Degrees" will return with original episodes in a new time slot, Fridays at 9:00 p.m., as of FRIDAY, MARCH 23.
ABC has announced that "Six Degrees" will return with original episodes in a new time slot, Fridays at 9:00 p.m., as of FRIDAY, MARCH 23.
Yeah my wife and I liked the show but now it looks as if the 2 March episodes aired and it's gone. I went to ABC.com and it's gone from the Show link at the top of the page. That sucks. Seems like every show I like goes bye-bye. Standoff on Fox, Six Degrees on ABC, and Studio 60 on NBC.
I saw the two episodes they ran in March; neither were very good. But I figured they were showing them just to fill space anyway.
Those are the "back nine" episodes. Uncertain yet if it gets an actual second season. See http://www.satelliteguys.us/showthread.php?t=75918
