Geez, this explains mass stupidity very well.

Does this mean the Tea Party will one day dominate?

This comment has been removed by a moderator.

So what if 11% are committed to an opinion and 11% are committed to the opposite opinion?

I guess you'd end up with a country evenly split on its political opinions.

Does this mean the Tea Party will one day dominate?

You didn't read the last paragraph of the article, did you?

The spread of Christianity in Rome comes to mind, although the idea may need to be entrenched prior in another, similar form:
"Christianity had many similarities to other cults that had already gained widespread acceptance. Mithraism, derived from eastern Zoroastrism was a belief in the son of the sun who also came to earth to rescue mankind from itself. The similarities in the stories of Jesus and Mithras cannot be overlooked as an aid in Christian growth. Mithras was extremely popular in the Legions, and as the army traveled throughout the empire, the acceptance of the monotheistic concept (and the story of the son of god coming to earth to save humanity) traveled with it."
The Catholic Church established itself as the final form by eliminating other rivalling adherents of Christian ideology by murdering them.

No wonder so many people are mindless sheep.

It is an interesting simulation which probably has little to do with real world dynamics.

Seldom, if ever, does a society divide itself along such simple lines. Human beings are far more complex and their interactions are far more complex than this.

The rise of Nazism is proof of this basic tendency to mass psychology. People who resist popular destructive beliefs are often in the minority at any given time.

I have never liked true believers. Closed minds are a terrible thing to waste.

No wonder so many people are mindless sheep.

No wonder, _since_ so many people are mindless sheep.

"The research has broad implications for understanding how opinion spreads. "There are clearly situations in which it helps to know how to efficiently spread some opinion or how to suppress a developing opinion," "
It worked for the NAZIs and 'progressives'.
But that was when they could control the media.

"The research has broad implications for understanding how opinion spreads. "There are clearly situations in which it helps to know how to efficiently spread some opinion or how to suppress a developing opinion," "
It worked for the NAZIs and 'progressives'.
But that was when they could control the media.

Only a Nazi would say that.

"When the number of committed opinion holders is below 10 percent, there is no visible progress in the spread of ideas."

If so, how does an idea spread from the first people who have it to 10% or more of the population?

"When the number of committed opinion holders is below 10 percent, there is no visible progress in the spread of ideas."

If so, how does an idea spread from the first people who have it to 10% or more of the population?


Persistent preaching.

"When the number of committed opinion holders is below 10 percent, there is no visible progress in the spread of ideas."

If so, how does an idea spread from the first people who have it to 10% or more of the population?


Subconscious and subliminal perceptions, especially of supernormal stimulus in the form of advertising trends .It's insanity to belittle the effects from subliminal stimuli by saying the effects don't last more than a few days, then turn a blind eye to the constant bombardment we face.

I would be interested to see if this research would hold true for something different, like clothing trends.

What this comes down to is that people in groups exhibit herd-like behavior. It only takes a few individuals to start a stampede, imo.

In some cases, opinion spreads more effectively than facts. Witness California's disfunctional government.

It would appear that masses are generally good at detecting passion for cause. They may not necessarily be able to tell whether the ideas presented make sense, but they can recognize and respect those willing to live and die for their beliefs. Regretfully, we haven't had anyone like that coming from rational science circles since Copernicus days.

So one can respond to a finding like this in one of the two ways.

1. One can bitch about how stupidity is contagious and masses are gullible at random nerditoriums.

2. Or, one can say game on, connect with the like-minded and start movement of their own. All you need it 10%...

Let's start spreading this idea:

"The stupendous spending of democratic governments, he says, doesnt signal the demise of the market economy. Rather, it indicates the cost of saving it the cost, in other words, of rehab. In fact, though, treatment of this kind can kill you. Its akin to blood-letting, the morbid practice of draining away peoples lives to assist their healing.

In these reflections, Canada again looks good. Canadian governments spend less than 40 per cent of GDP. By WCR assessment, Canada is the seventh most competitive nation on Earth. (The U.S., debt crisis notwithstanding, ties with Hong Kong at No. 1.) Virtue hath its own rewards, and Canada has kept the faith"
http://www.theglo...2106986/

Will be interesting to watch the decline of religions.
In my country (Norway), I think we have reached critical mass for Christianity. Now its perfectly normal to ask the real questions about the content of the Bible. E.g. why does not prayer work, when the Bible actually tells us it does.
If you are in doubt, just rip off a limb and start praying.

As most know, a Christian mainiac killed nearly 100 teenagers near Oslo last week. We dont need these nuts or their twisted beliefs.

As most know, a Christian mainiac killed nearly 100 teenagers near Oslo last week. We dont need these nuts or their twisted beliefs.

Some mass murderers hear the voice of God, others the Devil, and one has claimed to have been commanded by a dog, but it's insanity in the end. Does religion foster insanity, or is religious belief a symptom of it? I would expect that Norway is searching for answers in a religious context now despite questioning the Bible's content.

I figured out a long time ago that the people in charge write the rules. The visionaries are in charge because they wrote the rules. The bureaucrats write the rules because they are in charge. So I spend my time studying the rules.
The problem with monotheism: Absolute is basis, not apex, so a spiritual absolute would be the essence from which we rise, not an ideal from which we fell.
The problem with capitalism: Money is a contract, not a commodity.
The problem with physics: Time is not a vector from past to future, but the process of the future becoming the past. The patterns are effect, process is cause.
Because complexity goes parabolic when multiple frames are interacting, the tendency is to combine into one larger frame and reality becomes a function of centers of attraction, warping the space around them and competing with others. Whether galaxies, or politics.

This is nothing new, it has been used for ever. We even see this now. For anyone that watched the national addresses earlier, you saw a perfect example. Both blaming the other and each trying to use key words and interests that will sway as many as they can to their support. Media, politicians, televangelists, priests, and many many more use this. Most of them actually believe the same things that they say and teach, only because someone before them used techniques based on this same theory. For as long as there have people in power over others there have been people that study human nature and the effects of mob mentality were easy enough for people to understand and break it down.

Sounds like they developed a graphical way of depicting something a lot of people have known for a long time.

I am curious to know if the opinions were only digital -- yes or no, in relation to if the opinion was held.

Opinions are various shades of 'belief' in the concept. When 'talking' agents convince each other to one degree or another a third possibility in influencing opinion is the creation of a 'third opinion' (yes, no, a new hybrid opinion). Are the authors of the study willing/able to incorporate such a possibility into future studies? I mean, beyond 'holds both opinions.' Rather than being ambiguous in their belief, some agents are capable of creating a novel opinion taking specific elements from the previous two opinions, which then competes (supplants?) the previous opinions.

We can experience many physical phenomena during spreading of new ideas. For example, we can observe the concentration of antimatter, i.e. the dark matter around condensing proponents of new ideas, i.e. the layer of opponents, who have no better job, then just to oppose these new ideas passionately.

I think two good examples of this are Benny Hinn and his followers ( Turn sound off for this, trust me ):

http://www.youtub...U-DislkI

And " martial arts " practitioners :

http://www.youtub...aCIDvj6I

Both of those vids demonstrate mass gulliblity, disturbing in that they are representative of a state of willing ignorance based soley on what they believe other people will think about them and their choice to uphold something as real or tangible.

Religion is nothing but spiritual sophism, fake " masters ' and their students live in fantasyland.

As most know, a Christian mainiac killed nearly 100 teenagers near Oslo last week. We dont need these nuts or their twisted beliefs.

Charles Manson murdered because the Beatles told him to.
Ban all Beatles music!

As most know, a Christian mainiac killed nearly 100 teenagers near Oslo last week. We dont need these nuts or their twisted beliefs.

Charles Manson murdered because the Beatles told him to.
Ban all Beatles music!


No, Manson didn't murder anybody. You help prove the point of this article.

Both of those vids demonstrate mass gulliblity
...
Religion is nothing but spiritual sophism, fake " masters ' and their students live in fantasyland.

Impressive jump from two videos (one picture lies more than 1000 words) to an erroneous generalization used as verbal aggression.
Lack of empathy creates artefacts of this kind.

How so ? They both demonstrate people will believe and go along with something due to social pressure regardless of it's falsifiability.

Apparently, it takes 10% of a group to cause this leap in logic.

For a deeper understanding of the current findings I suggest reading up on the Elliott Wave Theory. Ralph Elliott discovered the rules for mass psychology almost 80 years ago. Today the Elliott Wave Theory, or Principle, is a widely used mathematical tool for predicting market movements and is the underlying algorithm for most computer driven investment programs. The real significance of the current study is that it demonsstrates that 10% "true believers" can turn their belief into a major impulse wave. Elliott's waves always undergo corrections, however, so whether or not they persist is a different story.

Who remembered this article in this connection? I's basically about the same stuff...

http://www.physor...rve.html

We can put a general question, why many phase transforms are considerably faster, than their corresponding steady states. IMO it's given with special perspective of the space-time, which we are living in. This space-time itself is formed with gradients like the water surface, so that the gradients are everything, what intelligent creatures can experience from it. If we would be a silly primitive organisms, then the stellar explosions would appear a much more gradual for us.

There is important aspect of sudden changes, which could be generalized easily. These changes appear sudden, because they're far away from our dimensional scale. It's sorta teleobjective perspective: the distant events appear more close each other, than these less distant ones. For example, the acceptation of Christianity or relativity theory may appear like sudden process for us from our distant perspective. But from perspective of its contemporaries it was actually a pretty slow gradual process, which took many generations.

The same perspective could be applied to Big Bang event - whereas it appears like giant sudden event from our distant perspective, we could face such process even by now in our close neighborhood. The event horizon of black holes appears sharp from distance, whereas from proximity it would appear like fuzzball surrounded with stellar clouds or like the galaxy.

Sophism is not a " rubber term " my friend, it is the eloquent spinning of BS, it matters not what is sold.

Show me the opposite of Benny Hinn if you can then, Mr falsifiable. Show me something that point's to a contradiction in the logic displayed by religious followers and wannabe Bruce Lee's.

I would love to see the opposite of a room filled with self-dillusioned folks.

BRODIX is wrong on two items: He says money is a contract, not a commodity. In original usage it was a commodity. Scripture's (my authority) word translated "money" is Keceph and literally means silver: mainstay of daily trade for 3000 years - after 580 BC with coins. Copper for lesser units. (Gold rare, for ship trades). Federal Reserve $ is a paper-electronic FRAUD of usury bankers now sucking 40 % of fed costs. End it. Repudiate such money/debt and use silver again! In 1910 South farmhands paid 10c (2.25 grams Ag) per hour. No more silver now, many more people: thus wages to restart lower.
---------------------------------------------
Time is a VECTOR of two dimensions: Real/imaginary. Physics and consciousness. Most don't know this and the rest of time's "secret" quality! I wrote how this solves dilemmas! But my MIT quantum advisor killed my idea, pushed her own! She's famous, I'm nobody. Not a "professional" scientist now. Nobody listens. 10% wave effect is real!

GAMMAKOZY Thanks for reminding us of the Elliott Effect...
once drilled into a few of us long ago by our rare high school history teacher as his own "secret" to events. (His name was Elliott too! Ralph's descendant? He never said.)

Basically the herd has no hard beliefs and so follows intense others who follow leaders that are presented as "respectful" by public relations manipulators, who run the show! See...

"Propaganda" (1928) by "first public relations council" Edward Bernays who hyped the US into entering World War I, people to smoke tobacco (notably new manufactured cigarettes), putting fluoride (mind numbing) in public water (he drank fresh water) eating pork (he's a Jew who didn't!), using his Uncle Freud's psychobabble of mind control, and listening to new CBS radio to hear... Controlled News! Retired, he wrote the book to his henchmen. He said in a democracy the govt is not run by ones who seem to run it, but by hidden ones (his kind!) Search it!

"The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society."
Where does he say "Jews" in this quote as you've inferred "his kind"? An anti-Semite would read that into the statement above, because the propaganda you've fallen for says Jews run the country, own the banks, control the media, etc. Who is your manipulator, Joseph Goebbels? Do me a favor and drop dead.

I don't think this finding is particularly new. The idea of a tipping point has been around for quite awhile. The one area that is not addressed is whether the ideas are good or bad and from the research it appears as if it doesn't matter. Popular ideas are the bane of the human race, and when a bad idea becomes popular it's hardly "progress."

Gustav Le Bon observed, "One of the most constant characteristics of beliefs is their intolerance. The stronger the belief, the greater the intolerance. Men dominated by a certitude cannot tolerate those who do not accept it." (Opinions and Beliefs, 1911).

"I would love to see the opposite of a room filled with self-dillusioned(sic) folks."

DARKNESS VISIBLE: 2010 summer conference
http://www.ast.ca...gs/dv10/

The Institute of Astronomy, Cambridge, summer conference will focus on Dark Matter, bring together recent progress in astrophysical studies, direct and indirect detection experiments, and the LHC. Couldn't resisit :)

Fnords Everywhere
In these novels, the interjection "fnord" is given hypnotic power over the unenlightened. Under the Illuminati program, children in grade school are taught to be unable to consciously see the word "fnord". For the rest of their lives, every appearance of the word subconsciously generates a feeling of uneasiness and confusion, and prevents rational consideration of the subject. This results in a perpetual low-grade state of fear in the populace.

In history we know about many symmetric situations, when small minority never got the credit from the mainstream, despite of their uncomfortable opinions were true. If the opinion of minority wouldn't correspond with background opinion of the rest at least a bit, the idea would never become widespread. For example, the Nazis in Germany would never gain their popularity, if every poor German would love the Jews (which they didn't at all).

We could say, their opinion weren't loud enough, but it wasn't problem of these particular preachers. The problem is, the majority of people tends to simple, convenient and comfortable answers and solutions.

10% of the US means around 30,000,000 people. The Tea Party is far from that. Since populations are usually made up of over 70% without an opinion, then 10% of the remaining 25% or so can be significant. Ever heard of the 100th monkey?