What Economists can learn from physics and finance
AbstractSome economists (Mirowski, 2002) have asserted that the neoclassical economic model was motivated by Newtonian mechanics. This viewpoint encourages confusion. Theoretical mechanics is firmly grounded in reproducible empirical observations and experiments, and provides a very accurate description of macroscopic motions to within high decimal precision. In stark contrast, neo-classical economics, or ‘rational expectations’ (ratex), is a merely postulated model that cannot be used to describe any real market or economy, even to zeroth order in perturbation theory. In mechanics we study both chaotic and complex dynamics whereas ratex restricts itself to equilibrium. Wigner (1967) has isolated the reasons for what he called ‘the unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics in physics’. In this article we isolate the reason for what Velupillai (2005), who was motivated by Wigner (1960), has called the ineffectiveness of mathematics in economics. I propose a remedy, namely, that economic theory should strive for the same degree of empirical success in modeling markets and economies as is exhibited by finance theory.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by University Library of Munich, Germany in its series MPRA Paper with number 2240.
Date of creation: Oct 2004
Date of revision:
Nonequilibrium; empirically based modelling; stochastic processes; complexity;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- C0 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - General
- A2 - General Economics and Teaching - - Economic Education and Teaching of Economics
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- A. Meltzer & Peter Ordeshook & Thomas Romer, 1983. "Introduction," Public Choice, Springer, Springer, vol. 41(1), pages 1-5, January.
- Gemunu H. Gunaratne & Joseph L. McCauley, 2002. "A theory for Fluctuations in Stock Prices and Valuation of their Options," Papers cond-mat/0209475, arXiv.org.
- A. P. Thirlwall, 1983. "Introduction," Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, M.E. Sharpe, Inc., M.E. Sharpe, Inc., vol. 5(3), pages 341-344, April.
- A. L. Alejandro-Quinones & K. E. Bassler & M. Field & J. L. McCauley & M. Nicol & I. Timofeyef & A. Torok & G. H. Gunaratne, 2004. "A Theory of Fluctuations in Stock Prices," Papers cond-mat/0409375, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2004.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Ekkehart Schlicht).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.