Why is a "social coordinate space" not Euclidean, and why is it worth mentioning?
..."phenomenological rules"...
It is an interesting subject... but this interview is a little annoying since it is with a philosopher in scientists clothing.
..."phenomenological rules"...
It is an interesting subject... but this interview is a little annoying since it is with a philosopher in scientists clothing.
And Ms. Flack, though her research interests extend beyond the realm of what is traditionally considered hard science, is most certainly a scientist - an evolutionary biologist specifically.
I assume you are linking to her LinkedIn profile to point out her "Doctor of Philosophy" degree? That's just the full, formal name for a PhD :P
If the space being considered is a probability space like you say, then there is no metric, there is a measure.
---
Why am I so pedantic?
Because I feel that the liberal arts mindset of writing is not serious enough for subjects where there is a ground truth to uncover.
In the article you link, where is the empirical study that compares how this model predicts reality?
I wish that people who publish on SIAMS, or ASA, AMS, IEEE affiliated journals were the ones trending on HN, and getting interviewed by journalists. A pessimist would say those people are too busy with their work for publicity, and that an empty barrel echoes loudest.