Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Sociophysics pp 69–90Cite as

Sociophysics: Weaknesses, Achievements, and Challenges

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 2100 Accesses

Part of the book series: Understanding Complex Systems ((UCS))

Abstract

The current trend of physics becoming “global” is analyzed. Underlying the initial hostility of the physics community, I focus on sociophysics in order to enumerate the conditions to establish a new scientific paradigm for the understanding of the human world. Epistemological foundations are suggested so as to be able to provide a framework and to streamline our new emerging field. Existing attempts of Soviet-like rewriting of the history of sociophysics are criticized. Weaknesses and strengths are reviewed with an emphasis on what is intrinsic and specific to the very nature of the field dealing with human beings, from what is structural in the way that the field is developing. Featuring the recent success of sociophysics in the prediction of a few real political events, a strategy is proposed to collectively validate the robustness of the sociophysics approach. The challenge is to provide solid tools to make sociophysics a quantitative and heuristic field of research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. S. Galam, “Sociophysics: A review of Galam models”, Int. J. Mod. Phys. C 19 409–440 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. R. N. Mantegna and H. E. Stanley, “An Introduction to Econophysics”, Cambridge University Press, England (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  3. A. L. Barabási and R. Albert, “Statistical mechanics of complex networks”, Rev. Mod. Phys., 74, 47 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. M. Droz and A. Pekalski, “Population dynamics with or without evolution: a physicist’s approach”, Physica A 336, 84 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. C. Castellano, S. Fortunato, V. Loreto, “Statistical physics of social dynamics”, Rev. Mod. Phys. 81, 591–646 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. S. Galam, B. Chopard, A. Masselot and M. Droz, “Competing Species Dynamics”, Eur. Phys. J. B 4, 529 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. B. Chopard, M. Droz and S. Galam, “An Evolution Theory in Finite Size Systems”, Eur. Phys. J. B 16, Rapid Note, 575 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  8. S. Galam, B. Chopard and M. Droz, “Killer geometries in competing species dynamics”, Physica A 314, 256 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. J. Majewski, H. Li and J. Ott, “The Ising Model in Physics and Statistical Genetics”, The American Journal of Human Genetics 69, 853 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. S. Galam, “The September 11 attack: A percolation of individual passive support”, Eur. Phys. J. B 26 Rapid Note, 269–272 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  11. S. Galam and A. Mauger, “On reducing terrorism power: a hint from physics”, Physica A 323, 695–704 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. S. Moss de Oliveira, P. M. C. de Oliveira, and D. Stauffer, “Evolution, Money, War, and Computers—Non-Traditional Applications of Computational Statistical Physics”, Teubner, Stuttgart-Leipzig (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  13. W. Weidlich, “Sociodynamics; A Systematic Approach to Mathematical Modelling in the Social Sciences”, Harwood Academic Publishers, Amsterdam (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Frank Schweitzer, Brownian Agents and Active Particles: On the Emergence of Complex Behavior in the Natural and Social Sciences, Springer, Berlin (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  15. D. Stauffer, S. Moss de Oliveira, P.M.C. de Oliveira, J.S. Sa Martins, “Biology, Sociology, Geology by Computational Physicists”, Elsevier, Amsterdam (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  16. B. K. Chakrabarti, A. Chakraborti, A. Chatterjee (Eds.), “Econophysics and Sociophysics: Trends and Perspectives”, Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA: Weinheim (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  17. S. Galam, “Sociophysics: a personal testimony”, Physica A 336, 49 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. K. G. Wilson and J. Kogut, “The renormalization group and the epsilon expansion”, Phys. Rep. 12C, 75 (1974)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. K. G. Wilson and M. E. Fisher, “Critical Exponents in 3.99 Dimensions”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 28, 240 (1972)

    Google Scholar 

  20. S. Galam, “About imperialism of physics”, Fundamenta Scientiae 3, 125 (1982)

    Google Scholar 

  21. P. Pfeuty and S. Galam, “Les physiciens et la frustrations des électrons”, La Recherche. July–August, 23 (1981)

    Google Scholar 

  22. S. Galam and P. Pfeuty, “Physicists are frustrated”, Physics Today Letter, April, 89 (1982)

    Google Scholar 

  23. P. Ball, “Utopia theory”, Phys. World October, 7 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  24. D. Stauffer, “Introduction to statistical physics outside physics”, Physica A 336, 1 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. T. C. Schelling, “Dynamic Models of Segregation”, J. Math. Sociology 1, 143 (1971)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. D. Stauffer and S. Solomon, “Ising, Schelling and self-organising segregation”, Eur. Phys. J. B 57, 473 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. D. Stauffer and S. Solomon, “Applications of Physics and Mathematics to Social Science”, arXiv:0801.0121 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  28. J. J. Schneider, private communication (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  29. S. Galam, Y. Gefen and Y. Shapir, Sociophysics: A mean behavior model for the process of strike, Journal of Mathematical Sociology 9, 1 (1982)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. W. Weidlich, “The statistical description of polarization phenomena in society”, British. J. Math. Stat. Psychol. 24, 251 (1971)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. W. Weidlich, “Synergetic modelling concepts for sociodynamics with application to collective political formation”, J. Math. Sociology, 18 (1994) 267–291

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. H. Wilhelmsson and L. Stenflo, “Nonlinearities and soliton-like structure in society”, Speculations in Science and technology 4, 297 (1981)

    Google Scholar 

  33. S. Galam, “Majority rule, hierarchical structures and democratic totalitarianism: a statistical approach”, J. Math. Psychology 30 426 (1986)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. S. Galam, “Social paradoxes of majority rule voting and renormalization group”, J. Stat. Phys. 61, 943 (1990)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. S. Galam, “Political paradoxes of majority rule voting and hierarchical systems”, Int. J. General Systems 18, 191 (1991)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. S. Galam, “Real space renormalization group and social paradoxes in hierarchical organisations”, in: Models of Self-organizationin Complex Systems (Moses), Akademie-Verlag, Berlin, vol. 64, 53 (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  37. S. Galam, Paradoxes de la regle majoritaire dans les systemes hirarchiques, Revue de Bibliologie 38, 62 (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  38. S. Galam, “Application of Statistical Physics to Politics”, Physica A 274, 132 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. S. Galam, “Contrarian deterministic effect: the hung elections scenario”, Physica A 333, 453 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. C. Borghesi and S. Galam, “Chaotic, staggered, and polarized dynamics in opinion forming: The contrarian effect”, Phys. Rev. E 73 066118 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. S. Galam, “From 2000 Bush–Gore to 2006 Italian elections: voting at fifty–fifty and the contrarian effect”, Quality and Quantity Journal 41, 579 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. K. Sznajd-Weron and J. Sznajd, “Opinion evolution in closed community”, Int. J. Mod. Phys. C 11, 1157 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. A.T. Bernardes, D. Stauffer and J. Kertsz, “Election results and the Sznajd model on Barabasi network”, Eur. Phys. J. B 25, 123 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  44. S. Galam, “Fragmentation versus stability in bimodal coalitions”, Physica A 230, 174 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. R. Florian and S. Galam, “Optimizing Conflicts in the Formation of Strategic Alliances”, Eur. Phys. J. B 16, 189 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. M. C. Gonzalez, A. O. Sousa and H. J. Herrmann, “Opinion formation on a deterministic pseudo-fractal network”, Int. J. Mod. Phys. C 15, 45 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. S. Fortunato and C. Castellano, “Scaling and Universality in Proportional Elections”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 138701 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. S. Galam, “Le dangereux seuil critique du FN”, \(\mathcal{L}\)e \(\mathcal{M}\)onde, Vendredi 30 Mai, 17 (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  49. S. Galam, “Crier, mais pourquoi”, Libération, Vendredi 17 Avril, 6 (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  50. J. J. Schneider and C. Hirtreiter, “The Impact of election results on the member numbers of the large parties in bavaria and germany”, Int. J. Mod. Phys. C 16 (2005) 1165–1215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. J. J. Schneider and C. Hirtreiter, “Investigation of Election Results, Numbers of Party Members, and Opinion Polls in Germany”, Int. J. Mod. Phys. C 19, 441 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. S. Galam, “Minority Opinion Spreading in Random Geometry”, Eur. Phys. J. B Rapid Note 25, 403 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  53. S. Galam, “The dynamics of minority opinion in democratic debate”, Physica A 336, 56 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. S. Galam, “Heterogeneous beliefs, segregation, and extremism in the making of public opinions”, Phys. Rev. E 71, 046123 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. P. Lehir, “Les mathématiques s’invitent dans le débat européen”, Le Monde, Samedi 26 Février, 23(2005)

    Google Scholar 

  56. S. Galam, “Pourquoi des élections si serrées ?”, Le Monde, Mercredi 20 Septembre, 22 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  57. S. Galam and F. Jacobs, “The role of inflexible minorities in the breaking of democratic opinion dynamics”, Physica A 381, 366 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. S. Galam, “Pas de certitude scientifique sur le climat,”, Le Monde, Mercredi 07 Fvrier, 20 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  59. V. Maurus, “Hérésie”, Le Monde, Samedi 18 Fvrier, Chronique de la médiatrice (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  60. S. Galam, “Global warming : a social phenomena”, Complexity and Security, The NATO Science for Peace and Security Programme, Chapitre 13, J. J. Ramsden and P.J. Kervalishvili (Eds.) (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  61. S. Galam, Les scientifiques ont perdu le Nord, Réflexions sur le réchauffement climatique, Éditions Plons, Paris (2008)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CREA, Boulevard Victor 32, 75015, Paris, France

    Serge Galam

Authors
  1. Serge Galam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Galam, S. (2012). Sociophysics: Weaknesses, Achievements, and Challenges. In: Sociophysics. Understanding Complex Systems. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2032-3_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation