Re: [OPE-L] Sraffa and the question of gravitation

[ajit sinha <sinha_a99@xxxxxxxxx>]

You are right. Cheers, ajit sinha
--- Paul Cockshott <wpc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Further point on page 14
> You have
> each a_i is strictly greater than q_{i,i},
> this is a relatively weak condition, surely you
> should have
> a_i >= sum_j (q_{j,i})
>
>
> Paul Cockshott
>
> www.dcs.gla.ac.uk/~wpc
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: OPE-L on behalf of ajit sinha
> Sent: Fri 4/27/2007 11:34 AM
> To: OPE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [OPE-L] Sraffa and the question of
> gravitation
>
> I have put a paper entitled, 'Sraffa and the
> question
> of equilibrium' written by myself and a colleague of
> mine on the SHE web site. This paper directly deals
> with an issue that has been, one way or the other,
> one
> of the major concerns of the discussions on this
> list.
> I would appreciate all critical or friendly comments
> or a seminar on this paper. I hope the content of
> the
> paper is provocative enough to bring out some of the
> people who have been mostly silent on this list. The
> paper can be eccessed from:
>
>
http://www2.economics.unsw.edu.au/nps/servlet/portalservice?GI_ID=System.LoggedOutInheritableArea&maxWnd=_Heterodox_WorkingPapers
>
>
> or from the SHE site:
>
> http://she.web.unsw.edu.au
>
> Cheers, ajit sinha
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com