Re: LCTM

[Bruce McFarling <ecbm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 04 Sep 2000 00:16:50 -0400, Henry C.K.Liu,
<hliu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, writes under the title
"Re: LCTM"

>The future is not an abstact state.  It is an intergation
>of a continuous sequential time inmcrement.  The Calculus of
>time-events makes the future predictable in theory, by
>considering each instant a differentiation of continuum.
>Calculus is a mathematical method of limiting the value of a
>function as a variable tends to approach zero. The basic ideas
>concern continuity and limits.

But, Henry, the calculus of time-events cannot make event
predictable in theory unless they are *already* predictable
in theory.  As Robert Rosen (the relational biologist) argues
in _Life Itself_, physics has stakes out for itself the
terrain of exact differentials for which these integrations
exist.  Conventional economics often follows the lead of
physics, imposing symmetry on second and higher order
differentials as required by the technique, but for which
no economic justification necessarily exists.

And of course that's only one line of argument. There's also
the chaotic line, for the case in which a future is
determinate in theory but NOT predictable in theory, since
large divergences over time are generated by small divergences
in initial condition, and we KNOW that we will have SOME
measurement errors.


--
Dr. Bruce R. McFarling, PhD
Bus. Office 1.72 -- (02) 4348-4078
School of Business
Faculty of the Central Coast
Newcastle University, Ourimbah