Re: flow or stock?

[Bruce McFarling <ecbm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sat, 10 Aug 2002 19:26:20 +0100, Harry Veeder
<eo200@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

[Quoth I]
>> Non-ergodicity does not mean that NOTHING can be determined over
>> ANY span in time.  This interpretation is underestimating what
>> a strong assumption ergodicity really is.  All that is required
>> is for the margin of error on predictions to increase without
>> bound (and without asymptotic approach to a bound) over time,
>> and the process is non-ergodic.

>To me, this sounds like an ergodic process because the the margin
>of error is predicted to _increase_ over time. As I understand the
>notion, a true non-ergodic future wouldn't even allow you to say
>whether the margin of error will increase or decrease over time.
>
>Harry Veeder
>
--
Dr. Bruce R. McFarling, PhD
Bus. Office 1.72 -- (02) 4348-4078
School of Business
Faculty of the Central Coast
Newcastle University, Ourimbah