Six Degrees of Separation
Filed under Science, 27 Comments,
Documentary unfolding the science behind the idea of six degrees of separation.
Originally thought to be an urban myth, it now appears that anyone on the planet can be connected in just a few steps of association.
Six degrees of separation is also at the heart of a major scientific breakthrough.
That there might be a law which nature uses to organize itself and that now promises to solve some of its deepest mysteries. (Excerpt from bbc.co.uk)
Watch the full documentary now
You might also like to watch these documentaries:
July 1st, 2009 at 01:09
Tremendous documentary on a most fascinating subject!
July 3rd, 2009 at 03:14
nice indeed.
July 8th, 2009 at 01:10
Thanks Vlatko, love this site. Been a fan for a while now and loving the new ones up.
Anything you can find to do with space would be good
Thanks again
Seb
August 15th, 2009 at 04:54
another absolutely brilliant BBC documentary!!!
5*/5
it manages to explain a very complex matter in a very comprehensive way. not only giving insight in the principles laying underneath the science, but also giving great examples of how it is put into practice… great job!
September 9th, 2009 at 01:28
very good documentary indeed…I was completely unaware of this new science and it is remarkable to see how it applies to so many things!
September 11th, 2009 at 07:28
The purveyors of the concept MUST re-title it for what it REALLY is… “TEN TO FIFTEEN Degrees of Separation, but no more than fifteen degrees.”
In the final scene alone, the package exchanged hands 3 times, yet these “degrees” of separation were not even counted in the six degrees of separation. And yet, if any of those final three people had not passed on the package, the package gets tossed in the round file, as is what happens countless thousands of times a day around the world.
Back when I allowed myself to be an employee I had people within the company I was working for who did not pass the package on to me, but had been told by the sender that in fact packages just like those UPS packets were sent off to me. So I have a special negative reaction to the glib use of the false phrase.
September 12th, 2009 at 04:49
Brilliant. They touched on some very interesting concepts. It’s amazing how the “hubs” are all around us. Makes perfect sense.
It also made me think that maybe the number 6 is about right. Those people could not possibly know the best route for the package, but some still made it. So with perfect knowledge of the network it might be possible to connect just about everyone.
October 5th, 2009 at 12:02
It really doesn’t matter whether it is six or `x’ degrees separation, as long as `x’ is manageable in normal human term, this concept of connectivity that exists in all natural groupings has far reaching implication and potential. It’s akin to finding the `worm’ in space travel.
October 29th, 2009 at 00:07
I guess the FACEBOOK has a potential to statistically prove this theory right or wrong. If someone reasonable gets all the data about everybody’s friends in that network and uses it to find out all the good links, the hubs and the error links. OOOuuuu, someone save us from thaaaat !!!
November 7th, 2009 at 09:48
Well, the network applications were interesting but the idea of networks is something I’ve instinctively/intuitively known all my life as I’m sure have most people on this planet but maybe not so concrete…They never did find the answer to the crickets, heart rates or lightening bugs (or did I miss it)…also, the synchronicity or coincidence of how these scientists found each other and the other information they found wasn’t completely explained either, what causes some connections to manifest into reality (be noticed and applied)??…it seems there must be some kind of intent for these events to meet, otherwise it would seem we would be overwhelmed with connections everyday or be totally alone…CG Jung had some good ideas on the subject of synchronicity…Watson’s diagrams reminded me of Sacred Geometry…I’d like to know more about this sciences applications, how would you apply this to pollution, greed, war etc?? and lastly 3 pkgs delivered out of 40?? this doesn’t appear to be a very significant amount…what would six degrees of separtation have been in 1602 or 1000 BC? How long would it have taken, so is this theory more valid now that we have more efficient technology?
December 26th, 2009 at 09:42
New Science, hardly. I wonder how much seperation there was between the mathematician and the Psych department or the library. Apparently to much, because clearly someone forgot to do research before he did research (the discovery was already discovered), as he would have found out if he aquired a copy of Michel Foucaults extensive discourse on power, networks, and information nodes that has been available since the 60's. Fun repeatable experiment though, but could have saved time, effort, brain strain and postage by opening up a book.
December 26th, 2009 at 13:27
The human network in 1000 BC or 1602 wouldn't have those random links that shrank the distance from one to node to another, so I guess you have to be a part of network that has grown naturally for this to apply. But I do agree that there is some intent that all these people found each other or 'stumbled upon' each other's work. It is also interesting to note that a lot of mathematics discovered and inventions are made in the same time period by different scientist e.g. Newton and Leibiniz coming up with calculus roughly in the same time period.
December 28th, 2009 at 08:08
Why six and why not seven?
January 2nd, 2010 at 12:48
It’s not another great BBC documentary but another great ABC documentary.
C ya from OZ!
January 2nd, 2010 at 12:55
I’ve learned from an extended interview that the world was already small in 1000BC as soon as early humans were mobile enough to connect distant tribes. This in accordance of what the theory says – the first few random links shrink the world significantly and adding a few more links is as small as it can get. It means that all these telecommunication devices can’t shrink the world much smaller as it was small already.
It doesn’t really matter 6 or 7 or 19…as it doesn’t matter either how many packages reached in this film the target. Most of the time people don’t pass things, can’t be bothered. But the connections even if they remain invisible are there. But for the sceptics read teh giant experiment conducted by Microsoft – delivered the same result!
Cheers.
January 7th, 2010 at 14:14
I stumbled upon this doc completely by accident while on YouTube.. Very interesting, must watch doc even for the non-science enthusiasts out there..
January 8th, 2010 at 15:23
Great documentary. I would like to see a follow up to this. Its clear that computer science can use this theory and from what i read, many companies are using this to do research in order to understand and then later to mold the behaviour of those who use their websites. I think there may be another hidden part of this idea that they didn’t examine, and that is that people often forget that nobody is unique and that every single thing that they do, whatever they are doing right now for example, there are probably hundreds and thousands of people who also do that behaviour and there will be many people doing exactly what you are doing right now. For example, i’m typing an entry on this website from my home computer. There are probably millions of people right this second doing almost exactly that, typing an entry onto some website. I’d say that the idea of networks and multiple universes have a lot in common. I think there is more that can be mined from this theory.
January 8th, 2010 at 23:31
WoW – a must see doc – this is the quantum theory of human realtionships. supremely interesting. Soooooo who amongst you can i connect to…..
January 29th, 2010 at 18:47
Very interesting. Again for those who lack quantitative intelligence like myself I can see the potential but I wouldn’t say I have any skill on the subject. There seems to me however to be a connection between this theory and chaos theory. Perhaps the network theory is the yin and chaos theory the yang in this new Tao of the future.
Underlying principles of reality that affect all systems if understood and applied will cause exponential development of human potential as a race. The triumph of the truth spreading virus – the scientific method.
Network theory and the practical engineering that will come soon in the future will become a part of all lives (has always been so) but with understanding it the possibilities are infinite.
February 15th, 2010 at 21:48
Camilla: Very interesting.
Dayton: That’s all?
Camilla: That’s all I need to say.
Dayton: Well OK then.
March 8th, 2010 at 20:23
Interesting! Wish I knew about math & science, but as an ignoramus, it seemed the exposition left a lot unexplained. Does a physical, chemical, material link act the same way as an intangible link? With intangible links, can we talk about relationships as links?
Eg., as a US citizen, I might have a constitutional relationship with my congressman – a formal link. But if I am one of his rich election funders, my relationship is much stronger than if I am not. Yes, no, maybe, or more importantly, mathematically definable?
This topic interests me in relation to the potential for Desktop Democracy – a grassroots, democratic, self-government system enabled by IT. It might replace the old top-down system, cutting away much of the superstructures of government & bureaucracy.
Anyone got any ideas?
March 8th, 2010 at 21:17
Tom if you are proposing an idea for web based grass roots democracy I guess we would all be up for that. Imagine after a week of web protest the foreign policy wars could be absolved. The bankers be investigated – and so forth. We can but dream!
March 8th, 2010 at 21:55
Yavanna,
hello. I can assure you there is much more to Desktop Democracy than pleasant dreams. At the least, it seems a self-consistent theory. Except, I have very little techie knowledge of how a grassroots-controlled DD network would run. That is hazy, since it would apply the will of the majority to the levers of power, so must work vertically & horizontally.
As I see it, it would allow a continuum of decision-making, not just a ballot every 4 years. Every community would be an agora, free time for self-government allowed by a 3-day work-week & universal wage. The 9-5 grind is dead as the dodo, made extinct by automation & cybernetics. So let’s live life! OGT
March 8th, 2010 at 22:03
OGT i love your way of thinking but there is always a however… and a but….
Such things would be properly considered decisions. Great so you and me we are both genius intellectuals (my little joke teehee) and we can be trusted to influence an entire nations future and foreign policy on a web vote – now multiply “US” by a million – or a billion – for fun.
Whilst your theory is beautiful in theory the reality would be chaos because “grass roots” includes mutated weeds ( trying to be kind with my analogy here)
I`ll continue my thoughts later being called away…..
March 9th, 2010 at 06:47
Yavanna,
yep, the doubts have occurred to me likewise. Prob; everyone being able to input their opinions, decisions & wishes into a total democrcacy network means chaos? A Tower of Babel?
Possibly, but if true, then it follows that democracy can only work if the ‘unwashed’ masses are kept out, or limited, & decisions left to some enlightened elite? Hmmm: that bothers me more – what Plato was saying 2000+ years ago. Subsequent US Revolution & Constitution proved him wrong, to a large degree.
Desktop Democracy & citizens’ self-government may offer a way out, since the gap b/ween governors & governed would be abolished. You want better schools, then you all get together, organize, & do it. Our ‘rights’ would be our responsibilities, not in the hands of bureaucrats-at-a-distance.
We need a science input here. Chaotic systems tend to evolve into order. Could quote Prigogine, but try to stick to what I u/stand! OGT
March 9th, 2010 at 12:33
One problem with the system would be this: who would be asking the questions that we would vote to? That is still an element of control. You could answer that by saying if 1000 people propose a “change” the question is elevated to be advertised to the broader masses so as to be considered. This would result in 100s if not 1000s of these questions being put to vote or consideration per day.
Now that would take each person several hours to go through each day. Even then to properly consider a single issue might take a great deal of research to consider the full ramifications, costs and priority. Consider the attention span of an average person and you see we have a problem. Most people would lose interest and remove themselves from the process. Fundamental and pedantic self interested people would be left.
Then you would have to consider that with such a system you would soon get grouping amongst the “web community” with what we might think of as pressure groups. Groups that would vote on block sometimes on very radical issues and this would lead to a problem we already have to a certain extent. The loudest voice is always heard.
Though I hate the corruptions of modern governments I do believe we still need some sort of government in a hierarchy form and into that could be incorporated some sort of web based democracy system. For instance the big questions could be put to the population by way of referendum. Even so; who would decide which of these questions would be asked? In theory we already have this capability within our current “democracies.” Yet even when the public are screaming out for a referendum we are not allowed one. One example: in the UK we didn’t want the Euro. Most of us don’t even want to be part of Europe. These are issues that we wanted referendums on and didn’t get.
March 9th, 2010 at 19:01
Yavanna,
fear not; the greatest issues would be engaged by the best minds. This is what encouraged & worried me by the video. Certain individuals would tend to be the ‘hubs’, loci of opinion & dissent. Like it or or not, collective concerns & thinking always are drawn to he singular mind, or a few spokespeople. Group consciousness is always expressed by, or via, an individual. That’s the way it works. Sure, a great deal of new & awkward questions would be thrown up by a truly bottom-up grassroots system. That need not appall us, becos true democracy is always unstable & dynamic. That frightens the many who yearn for a 100% secure & predictable system. So welcome to the prison camp! But if you want freedom, you will have to learn to live with disorder. The play of order & disorder is human history. All we can hope for is to play the game better. One big advance of self-government – it annuls the gap between wanting ‘X’ & implementing policy ‘X’. In the past, this was always a matter for division of labor & responsibility. If we didn’t get ‘X’, there was always some other to blame. Now, there will be no convenient scapegoats. How strange & challenging the world outside the slave barracks! OGT