[PREV - FALSE_KARL] [TOP]
SCALING_SIMILARITY
May 6, 2008
BLACK_SWAN
The roughness of terrain is invariant
with altitude only over some ranges
of altitude (and for some terrain).
Go up high enough and the earth seems
perfectly smooth (albeit, not quite a sphere).
And similarly (uh, no pun -- well, whatever),
fire may exhibit that celebrated bifurcating
fractal self-similarity at different
magnitudes, but there really is a noticeable
difference between large fires and small.
This is why a cheap special effect such as
burning a small model of a building never
looks quite right on film.
"Some people ... have accepted the fractal 'up
to a point.' They argue that wealth, book
sales, and market returns all have a certain
level where things stop being fractal.
'Truncation' is what they propose. I agree that
there is a level where fractality _might_stop,
but where? Saying that there is an upper limit
_but I don't know how high it is_, and saying This depends
_there is no limit_ carry the same consequences on what you're
in practice." trying to
practice.
-- p. 266, Nicolas Nassim Taleb,
_The Black Swan_
(April 17, 2008)
And in a footnote, Taleb mentions there
may be effective limits on the
extremity of Extremistan, but he
takes these limits as so high that
we might as well call them infinite.
Consider the possibility
that there are actual limits
to the effect of wild cards.
If you can draw a probable
boundary around the effects
of even extreme events,
that in itself might be
useful
The upper bound will never
be found by someone who There are places
doesn't accept that it might you can start:
exist.
It would seem that
The style of scenario the maximum number
planning favored by of book sales would
Peter Schwartz be less than the
encourages people to world population.
consider some extreme
scenarios to get a
sense of the range of
things that can
happen.
--------
[NEXT - DARK_BALZAC]