Re: chaos

[glevy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]

Lisa wrote:

> Are you both using chaos in the technical sense?  Should we use some
> way to distinguish between casual and technical uses?  Maybe it'll be
> clear enough from context, once I go back and catch up on the
> grossman etc. thread.
>
The real issue involved with this thread does not concern Grossmann, but
the dynamic processes of capitalist accumulation and crises. We have
discussed this issue before somewhat when we discussed the concepts of
equilibrium and disequilibrium in Marx's political economy.  While Marx
used the concept of equilibrium (e.g. in the reproduction schemes in Book
2), his theory of accumulation was a decidedly disequilibrium theory. The
real question here is how  we understand the nature of
disequilibrium within the context of the capitalist accumulation process.
Can the "laws of motion" of capital be understood using a chaotic
mathematical model or is another form of logic required to grasp these
dynamics? To answer that question, one must consider the limitations of
the mathematical model and alternative means for analyzing complex
relationships.

Jerry


     --- from list marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---

     ------------------