Is (Google) PageRank invalidated by this econ. paper from 1940s?

Some early versions of PageRank are discussed the PageRank: Standing on the shoulders of giants

My question is whether any of the prior art mentioned in the article would be sufficient to invalidate Google's Patent 7,269,587 on the PageRank algorithm?

It seems to have the same premise as Google's PageRank.

Patent: 7,269,587

Inventor: Larry Page

Assigned to: Stanford University (now licensed exclusively to Google)

Priority date: Jan 10, 1997

The main independent claim is as follows:

1. A computer implemented method for calculating an importance rank for N linked nodes of a linked database, the method comprising:

• (a) selecting an initial N-dimensional vector p0, wherein each component of p0 represents a probability that a user will start at a given node, wherein each node of the N linked nodes is a computer-readable document containing information;

• (b) computing an approximation pn to a steady-state probability p∞, wherein each component of p∞ represents a probability that the user will randomly end up at a particular node after following a number of forward links, in accordance with the equation pn=Anp0, where A is an N×N transition probability matrix having elements A[i][j] representing a probability of moving from node i to node j; and

• (c) determining a rank r[k] for a node k from a kth component of pn, wherein r[k] represents an importance of the information contained in node k.

-
Jonathan, AskPatents is an online service in Q&A format where users help find prior art on US Patent Applications and US Patents and ask questions about the US Patent process. It is difficult for the community at Ask Patents to answer your question because you have not provided a US Patent Number. Feel free to modify your question and resubmit. Please see the faq for more information about which topics are on topic. Sorry for any confusion. –  Micah Siegel Aug 26 at 5:53
Added the US patent number. –  Jonathan Howard Aug 26 at 15:03
Jonathan, The question has been reopened with more information about the patent number you cite. Thanks for participating in Ask Patents! –  Micah Siegel Aug 26 at 18:33