Barkely Rosser, bless his soul, knows quite a bit about this. Maybe Max can get him to chime in.
Pareto influenced Mandelbrot, whose key article was on cotton prices. This gave rise to the Santa Fe Institute & the support for that way of thinking. Sam Bowles not runs their econ. Program. One interesting point about all of this. Economists have been going around trying to bully social scientists with their math. When Time on the Cross was first published, most historians seemed to be initially intimidated. Now that economists are coming up against people trained in physics, they may revert to actually studying the economy instead of their "tools." Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University michael at ecst.csuchico.edu Chico, CA 95929 530-898-5321 fax 530-898-5901 -----Original Message----- From: PEN-L list [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jim Devine Sent: Monday, December 12, 2005 10:36 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [PEN-L] econophysics Pareto. I think the econophysics folks think that economics is so bad that they don't have to study it at all. It's like the leading lights at MIT economics, who don't study econ. unless it's mathematical. On 12/12/05, Max Sawicky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Didn't Pareto or some dude gin up this notion 100 years ago? > December 11, 2005/New York TIMES > Econophysics > By CHRISTOPHER SHEA > > Victor Yakovenko, a physicist at the University of Maryland, happens > to think that current patterns of economic inequality are as natural, > and unalterable, as the properties of air molecules in your kitchen. -- Jim Devine "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own way and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante.
