Bulba! <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Frankly, I find such models to be built on over-stretched analogies > to physics - how _exactly_ is gravity supposed to be an analogy > equivalent to economic "forces"? Sure such model can be built - but > is it adequate in explaining real-world phenomenons? Analogy > tends to be the weakest form of reasoning. I'd be wary of making > such analogies. Apparently the Gravity Model is still of some interest, if recent citations are an indication. I'm not an expert, but all the economic models I was taught were also grounded in math, not just analogy. gravity models: http://faculty.washington.edu/krumme/systems/gravity.html some empirical studies: http://www.hec.unil.ch/mbrulhar/Empirtrade/#gravity > Models like this probably tend to be built by French engineers from > this joke: > > The American and French engineers work together on some > product (that would look strange nowadays but it's not impossible > in principle). > > The Americans show the French engineers a working prototype. > > The French engineers scratch their heads and ask warily: > > "OK, it works in practice; but will it work in theory?" > Yeah, I hate it when people try to understand things. cheers -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list