International standard of famous

[jack]

When thinking about David, the question came up of the most famous piece of art (Mona Lisa?), and how to measure that, and swiftly thence to people. A similar criteria of famousness, say "percentage of people who have heard of", can apply equally well to people, art, and other things.

The obvious suggestion was to normalise between 0.0 and 1.0. It was originally going to be normalised to Jesus at 1.0, but that was probably not complete, so I decided 1.0 should be things known to everyone. That provides some baseline. Say "the sun" is up at 1.0.

I guessed Jesus would be the most famous person (including mythology), being as how people have heard of him all over the world. However, Livredor pointed out that it's quite possible he's not known all over China, and getting 1 biln people in China is a noticeable chunk of that elusive 1.0 score. If you are known to everyone except China, your fame is 0.83 or similar. On the other hand, Chairman Mao has been pretty well known everywhere else; is it possible he actually was more famous than Jesus?

Is there anyone else with a score of 80%+? Real or mythological? You can come up with other concepts in that range. (eg. "Ocean" is known to most adults, but not all. "God" probably doesn't include all small-g gods though.)

Another approach would be to integrate population over time. Jesus, being so widley known for 1000+ years probably beats out anyone mainly known in their own lifetime or own continent. However, he probably also beats out anyone known for N thousand years before that, due to recent explosive population growth.

Another would be to integrate percentage over time. I'm not sure what effect that would have. Anyone from the start of time would be known to everyone, if they could just stay famous long enough, but more recent people may have more staying fame if they do manage to be widely known. Will someone famous for millennia in late BC beat out both?

Comments

[redbird]

At one point, the most famous American was Muhammad Ali. These things get complicated.

I like the metric of percentages of people, and am not at all sure whether someone who would say "Oh, right, Muhammad Ali, wasn't he an athlete or something?" would count. Ditto people who would respond to a name with "All I know is I heard on the radio that she broke up with someone, but I don't actually know who either of them is." There's also the category of people who will think any not-too-alien name is vaguely familiar even the first time they hear it, and the related category of "heard of someone else of the same name"--that covers politicians named John Smith, and possibly people who would tell you they'd heard of Sarah Palin but, when asked further, talk about Monty Python's Flying Circus.

[cartesiandaemon.livejournal.com]

At one point, the most famous American was Muhammad Ali.

:) Coolness.

whether someone who would say "Oh, right, Muhammad Ali, wasn't he an athlete or something?" would count.

:) I'd exclude people who have a vague sense of familiarity, but was intending to include people who could place them even in the most general terms, including "athlete or something", so long as that is obviously referring to the same person.

But as I was saying to scribb1e, I'm not at all sure that's the best definition of fame, it just seems most convenient for these purposes, as otherwise it'd be just too hard to know where to draw the line, whereas with "heard of", you can easily check with someone if you want to. And for the most famous people we're thinking of, I'm guessing/hoping the number of people who know who they are trails in about the same amount the people who've heard the name.