tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6837159629100463303.post2112873888208319318..comments2023-06-18T01:25:08.748-07:00Comments on Information Transfer Economics: Is economics just a collection of names?Jason Smithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12680061127040420047noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6837159629100463303.post-52930297930305263742015-08-04T14:59:28.503-07:002015-08-04T14:59:28.503-07:00And here I thought you were checking every day wit...And here I thought you were checking every day with bated breath!<br /><br />:)Jason Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12680061127040420047noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6837159629100463303.post-73250096893846026032015-08-03T21:46:26.787-07:002015-08-03T21:46:26.787-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.LALhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08196675112184615614noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6837159629100463303.post-79374054452921203782015-08-03T21:46:16.655-07:002015-08-03T21:46:16.655-07:00You tricked me! I was waiting til August...I think...You tricked me! I was waiting til August...I think all you are noticing here is that economics is a liberal art and primarily engaged in comparative fiction.LALhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08196675112184615614noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6837159629100463303.post-91523333768608218182015-07-17T10:55:14.235-07:002015-07-17T10:55:14.235-07:00"I hope to have my name in one of those lists..."I hope to have my name in one of those lists some day."<br /><br />I can see it now: Smith-Smith-Smith. :)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6837159629100463303.post-83327372389378416672015-07-15T17:45:20.996-07:002015-07-15T17:45:20.996-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.By The Wayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11544413001329820101noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6837159629100463303.post-17016863554461733522015-07-15T17:41:07.757-07:002015-07-15T17:41:07.757-07:00Hi Tom,
Classical is a 'retronym' for &qu...Hi Tom,<br /><br />Classical is a 'retronym' for "not quantum", so yes relativity is part of classical mechanics.<br /><br />My point was about models of a real physical or economic system. Feynman diagrams are a technique, not a model. Schrodinger equation is a piece of quantum mechanics. Maxwell's equations are a particular formulation of electrodynamics (L = tr F ∧ ★F is another way to write it down in terms of a lagrangian, differential geometry and Yang-Mills theory -- which is math not a model of a particular system).<br /><br />The Navier-Stokes equations are just another set of equations -- combined with some other things they become e.g. magnetohydrodynamics or fluid mechanics (models of physical systems).<br /><br />Shannon-Hartley is a piece of information/communications theory (the model of the physical system).<br /><br />I wasn't saying there aren't things that are named for people in physics or mathematics. I was saying there is a lack of modern macro models with technical names. The quantity theory of money is a good technical name. It isn't called Hume-Fisher or Pigou-Keynes. Evolution isn't called Darwin-Wallace.<br /><br />Some of the models I listed at the top are "New Keynesian" which implies a collection of assumptions and mechanisms the models have in common. <br /><br />Actually -- there is an interesting insight with the constants. There aren't any established constants in economics that could be given names.Jason Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12680061127040420047noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6837159629100463303.post-14394706136920331522015-07-15T17:06:11.780-07:002015-07-15T17:06:11.780-07:00"Newtonian physics is one that immediately co..."Newtonian physics is one that immediately comes to mind (the technical term is [classical] mechanics, though)"<br /><br />Wait, I about six months ago I learned that relativity was considered part of "classical" mechanics. So I naturally thought that "Newtonian physics" meant basically classical w/o the relativity (and perhaps a few other things, like Maxwell's equations). Did I get that wrong?<br /><br />Just off the top of my head there's Feynman diagrams, Schrodinger's equation, Planck's constant, Boltzman's constant (and brains), Bell's inequality, Maxwell's equations, the "Hamiltonian," and of course all those fun units (Volts, Watts, Amperes, etc). I'm not terribly good at this game, and perhaps those are not really what you're getting at... but this is fun, so let me continue:<br /><br />In engineering, I've encountered Riccati equations, Navier Stokes equations, the Bernoulli effect and distribution, Gaussian distributions, Rician, Rayleigh and Maxwell distributions, Swerling's RCS models, Euler angles, Dirac and Kronecker delta functions, Von Neumann machines, Bellman's principle of optimality, Kalman filters, Wiener filters, Kirchhoff's laws, Cauchy–Schwarz inequality, and Cauchy criterion, Pythagoras' theorem, Shannon–Hartley theorem, Laplace and Fourier transforms, "Laplacians," Cholesky factorizations, Lyapunov stability, Lebesgue and Riemann integration, Boolean algebra, L'Hopital's rule, Taylor series, Gauss's Law, Poisson's equation and distribution, Helmholtz decomposition, Faraday's law, Higgs boson, Einsteinium (and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_whose_names_are_used_in_chemical_element_names" rel="nofollow">these other elements</a>), Kreb's and Carnot cycles, Pasteurization, Keplerian orbits, Galois theory, Hubble's and Moore's law ... (OK, I wandered a bit off the reservation there at times)... ...and by no means do I mean to imply those are counterexamples to your point. I just got carried away. (c:Tom Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17654184190478330946noreply@blogger.com