PEN-L
mailing list archive
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]
Date:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Thread:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Index:
[ Author
| Date
| Thread
]
Re: econophysics
- To: PEN-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: econophysics
- From: Julio Huato <juliohuato@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 20:01:41 -0500
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition; b=uuunQx/71spN6lwDCVCD9g2wVJH5orR8TA6bgal1Sp4kGur5R4BOw8CzP8Wu5E59k8kY0U0FFgAaAvuY7b6xYAFNnBkMURI8eZPu+fVNNn7fbBYfNN5eRd2OAUlFa0tlcOfsZzEx+E8p3l2ZnFTKhjgJHIV6CZNDe5qVZkcMRnw=
Michael Perelman wrote:
> Pareto influenced Mandelbrot, whose key article was on cotton prices.
> This gave rise to the Santa Fe Institute & the support for that way of
> thinking. Sam Bowles not runs their econ. Program.
>
> One interesting point about all of this. Economists have been going
> around trying to bully social scientists with their math. When Time on
> the Cross was first published, most historians seemed to be initially
> intimidated. Now that economists are coming up against people trained
> in physics, they may revert to actually studying the economy instead of
> their "tools."
If the paper by Joseph L. McCauley is representative of the approach
physicists take on economic theory, then I'm not impressed.
Julio
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]