This is a MapHist list message (when you hit 'reply' you're replying to the whole list) o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o +
Il giorno 24/dic/2010, alle ore 18.58, Carlo Petuchia ha scritto: > This is a MapHist list message (when you hit 'reply' you're replying to the > whole list) > o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + > > Doug, > > I do not think any of these models are really arcane...it is true that > many of the cartometric methods developed in the last 40 years or so since > Tobler's Bi-dimensional regression have been slow to catch on in the history > of cartography but in other fields with historical components like > archaeology, paleontology and evolutionary biology, these types of > statistical and stochastic models have been quite useful and are well known > to academic researchers. The one thing I find inertesting about Hessler's > paper and those by other people who do this sort of work, like Gaspar and > Livieratos for example, is that they actually treat the measurement aspect of > map creation as if it is something that is encoded in the final map, which of > course it is. In other words as if the map is the outcome of a measurement > process that can tell us something of the technology and science that created > the data it visually displays. There are many modern theories of measurement > and I think they can be quite useful in historical studies of material > culture that are the result of the outcomes of measurement. Hessler assumes a > model from Bas van Fraasen, who I think he studied with, which assumes that > every measurement using an instrument (like a compass or astrolab) is > composed of three things: > > 1. a family of observables M (physical magnitudes like declination and > longitude) each with a range of possible values. > > 2. a set states S...physical states of both the system measured ( the moving > ship for example) and of the measuring system (the human compass interaction). > > 3. a stochastic response function P for each m in M and s in S, which is a > probability measure of the range m with P to be interpreted as the > probability that a measurement of m will give a value in E, if performed when > the state is s. > > This is exactly how people like me who study the outcomes of quantum > measurements in particle accelerators think of any measurement process. In > any case I certainly appreciate the excercise of these multi-disciplinary > researchers. > > Happy Holidays to all. I am on my way back home to Padua. > > Carlo > > > > On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 5:01 PM, Doug McIlroy <[email protected]> wrote: > This is a MapHist list message (when you hit 'reply' you're replying to the > whole list) > o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + > > >Funny things is all these great mathematical models remind me of > >the "very elegant mathematics" used in the mainstream economic > >theory of the last 2 decades which showed that markets function > >perfectly and that we are living in the best of all worlds. > > Much writing on economics has the flavor of natural sciences > in ancient Greece: by pure reasoning, without data, a perfect > market gets described. Then the description gets equated with > reality. But that's not what the best economists are up to. > A major fraction of recent Nobel prizes in economics have been > awarded for studies of how that idea fails. (Though one may > well deplore the inversion of blame implicit in referring to > discrepancies as "market failure".) > > But John Hessler has not theorized without data. He analyzed a > lot of data and apparently found that a particular model > fits the data quite well. It may be arcane, but it's not > ungrounded. Should you wonder about the origins of geographic > quirks in maps, his statistical characterization of those quirks > could help in judging various explanations. > > Doug McIlroy > _______________________________________________ > MapHist: E-mail discussion group on the history of cartography > hosted by the Faculty of Geosciences, University of Utrecht. > The statements and opinions expressed in this message are those of > the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the University of > Utrecht. The University of Utrecht does not take any responsibility for > the views of the author. > List Information: http://www.maphist.nl > > Maphist mailing list > [email protected] > http://mailman.geo.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/maphist > > _______________________________________________ > MapHist: E-mail discussion group on the history of cartography > hosted by the Faculty of Geosciences, University of Utrecht. > The statements and opinions expressed in this message are those of > the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the University of > Utrecht. The University of Utrecht does not take any responsibility for > the views of the author. > List Information: http://www.maphist.nl > > Maphist mailing list > [email protected] > http://mailman.geo.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/maphist _______________________________________________ MapHist: E-mail discussion group on the history of cartography hosted by the Faculty of Geosciences, University of Utrecht. The statements and opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the University of Utrecht. The University of Utrecht does not take any responsibility for the views of the author. List Information: http://www.maphist.nl Maphist mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.geo.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/maphist
