Quote Originally Posted by Presley Cannady View Post
Whether or not alpha represents the structure of the insurgency in any way remains to be seen (and I can't even find the results of this research online, so it may be premature to say the least). It's possible this "theory" why alpha is stable around some point (2.5) may be no more than one working hypothesis amongst many. Gourley is coupling another unstated assumption, group dynamics, to this model in order to explain alpha and his talk completely skimped over that point.

The power law "works" because we intuit the probability of destructive events occurring decreasing with their destructiveness (nuclear terrorism on a Western target is harder and costlier than setting an IED in your own backyard). Everything else is a question of how it behaves in a scaling limit. The fact that it behaves like a power law at all means that it can only not be a power law asymptotically--some other term overwhelms the scaling exponent and breaks invariance--or the function is piece wise with the addition of more data.
From what I googled on Gourley, apparently he is working out in San Fran right now. I may contact him to see if he can share some more of his findings; however, if his team is analyzing a working hypothesis, then they might not want to share.

I was suprised that he submitted it to Ted, and even more suprised that they accepted it without any analysis.

IMO, Dr. Gordon McCormick (NPS Defense Analysis) could probably have presented a more thorough briefing.

Regardless, his presentation is sparking discussion amoungst practisioners and academics. That is a good thing.

v/r

Mike