PDA

View Full Version : Statistical Physics, Economics & Demographics (was: why [...] physics [...] in finance and biology?)


markwh04@yahoo.com
Oct11-06, 03:24 PM
double d wrote:
> After my PhD in mathematical physics 15 years ago from Harvard, I
> have been applying math theories on Wall Street. It is a mystery
> why math theories describe electrons. But why does math theories also
> apply so well to Wall Street?

It's not a mystery at all, but a logical consequence of the fact
that...

> Human traders are not electrons after all.

... statistical physics is the general study of ANY composite system
formed of a large number of similar components; particularly the study
of the collective behaviors of this system. It applies just as well to
an assembly of something, when that "something" is people, rocks, cue
balls, particles, cars, bits on a network, cells, etc. It doesn't
matter what the system is, or at what level the abstraction is made
(particles to physical objects, individuals to societies, cells to
bodies, stars to galaxies; galaxies to universes; etc.). The same
general principles will come to bear; and the same math and methods
will apply.

> M.M. Demers PhD
> Co-President
> EquityValue Investments
> New York, NY 10024
> http://jobs.phds.org/jobs/markdemers15/listing_2005_05_12

Therefore all true experts in economics are physicsts -- and none are
experts unless they are also are physicists, either in fact, deed or
frame of mind.

Demographics falls heavily under the sway of this framework, in
particular. This is why you find, for instance, publication of a paper
on the world population curve in a physics journal (e.g. Sergei
Kapitza). Or you find interesting analogies drawn between non-linear
systems exhibiting similar behavior, such as the bent rod, the Schloegl
model or (in business economics) the Glass Ceiling/Glass Floor.

Overview of Chapter 9, "The Glass Floor" of the _Fall_of_Mankind_
http://federation.g3z.com/FedSeries/FallOfMankind/09.htm

(The Glass Floor occurs where the population at the top of the
hierarchy undergoes an abrupt inversion, following the crowding at the
entry level by the formerly subordinate group, with the formerly
dominant group locked out from below; the Glass Ceiling is where the
formerly dominant population retains it status at the top, even when
crowded out at the bottom of the hierarchy. The two states are
branches in a hysteresis loop).

Nick Maclaren
Oct11-06, 03:29 PM
In article <1118693115.510393.34390@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.c om>,
markwh04@yahoo.com writes:
|>
|> Therefore all true experts in economics are physicsts -- and none are
|> experts unless they are also are physicists, either in fact, deed or
|> frame of mind.

Why can't they be mathematical statisticians?

Physics should not attempt to hijack the whole of science, though
I agree that all boundaries between sciences are artificial and
often unhelpful.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

markwh04@yahoo.com
Oct11-06, 03:32 PM
Nick Maclaren wrote:
> |> Therefore all true experts in economics are physicsts -- and none are
> |> experts unless they are also are physicists, either in fact, deed or
> |> frame of mind.
>
> Why can't they be mathematical statisticians?

Because it's in an empirical science.

> Physics should not attempt to hijack the whole of science,

"Physics" is not some external creature that does stuff to things.
It's something YOU'RE doing, when you're doing it, whether you want to
or not.

If you're doing statistical physics, you're doing statistical physics.
Even if you're not, you automatically are by default. So, you better
get the shored up on the field you're tacitly using and the hat you're
tacitly wearing, when using it and wearing it. It has nothing to do
with "hijacking", which is semantically invalid, since you're the agent
doing the doing here, when doing the doing, not the one being done to,
when the doing gets done.

Jean-Claude Arbaut
Oct11-06, 03:33 PM
On 23/06/2005 02:30, markwh04@yahoo.com wrote:

>> Why can't they be mathematical statisticians?
>
> Because it's in an empirical science.

What ? Statistics ? Are you kidding ?

Paul Danaher
Oct11-06, 03:37 PM
markwh04@yahoo.com wrote:
> Nick Maclaren wrote:
>>>> Therefore all true experts in economics are physicsts -- and none
>>>> are experts unless they are also are physicists, either in fact,
>>>> deed or frame of mind.
>>
>> Why can't they be mathematical statisticians?
>
> Because it's in an empirical science.

This is probably a good time to introduce Robert H. Nelson's "Economics
as religion", pub. Pennsylvania State University Press, ISBN
0-271-02284-1.