Re: chaos

[Allin Cottrell <cottrell@xxxxxxx>]

Steve Keen wrote:

> I think the best overall rubric is that [chaotic] systems display
> "far from equilibrium" behaviour: what happens at the equilibrium
> point(s) of such a system is irrelevant in one sense, because
> the systems will never get to equilibrium.

Is that right?  I thought that for a system exhibiting chaos,
the equilibrium takes the form of neither a fixed point nor
a limit cycle, but a 'strange' (fractal) attractor.  If you
stochastically perturb a chaotic system, will it not typically
return to this equilibrium (i.e. move back onto the attractor)
quite quickly?

Perhaps this is a semantic point; I'm not sure.

Allin Cottrell
Department of Economics
Wake Forest University




     --- from list marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---

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