Talk:Econophysics
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Anybody working in Econophysics?
[edit] History
I am actually working in that field. In my opinion the current article could be greatly improved, especially in the historical part. I just added a short sentence and a reference on the analogy between mechanical equilibrium and general equilibrium theory. However, there are many other issues that could be added and that show the link among physics, other hard sciences and economics. Escalas 22:01, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Contents
I would like to propose a major revision of this page. After the general definition of econophysics, the history section could be extended to include both a history of relationship between physics and economics and, then, the more recent history of econophysics as a sub-branch of statistical mechanics. A new section could point to recent trends in econophysics and to the main conferences where one can find econophysics contributions. I am looking forward to hearing your opinions. Escalas 22:23, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
- Ciao Enrico---Joe W. here. I would suggest that we take the opportunity to do several things:
- First, as you suggest, a clear separation between "economics and physics crossover" which has been happening for a long time, and the genuine field of econophysics, which is recent.
- We need to touch on false analogies between the two, e.g. some of the things discussed in Nelson's book Economics as Religion, where he mentions how various economics theorems take their names from physical laws pretty much as a propaganda mechanism.
- A discussion of theoretical motivations within economics itself for going beyond traditional methods, e.g. Hahn's "The next hundred years". This can be related to the fundamentally different methods applied in theoretical economics and physics.
- Criticisms of econophysics. The example cited after the Krugman comment seems to me pretty fatuous---it's hardly a major claim of econophysics that bubble physics is related to economics---but it nevertheless highlights an important example, of physicists simply taking an existing physics model and dressing it in "economic clothes" without any real justification. More important are the criticisms of Ormerod and colleagues. The ideas discussed in James' Feigenbaum's review, "Financial physics", should also be referred to.
- Early examples of related material. We should probably mention Galam and colleagues' "Sociophysics" paper from 1982 (I can forward you a copy). Galam's "personal testimony" (Physica A, 2004) refers to earlier papers as well, e.g. Weidlich (1971) and Callen & Shapiro (1974).
- I'm sure I can think of other things but those spring to mind for now. WebDrake 11:39, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Rewrite of the article
Escalas and I are going to do a major rewrite of the Econophysics article, among which are the following aims:
- Much-improved history, discussing in greater detail historical physics/economics links
- A better distinction between "physics-like stuff in traditional economics" and the modern field of econophysics
- Connections and influences from other interdisciplinary fields of physics such as sociophysics
- A wider range of references
If anyone else is interested in joining us on this, we would be delighted.
The rewrite can be found for the moment at Talk:Econophysics/Econophysics. —WebDrake 20:40, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
A Question of Note....
What would Econophysics make of Transfinancial Economics?
http://www.p2pfoundation.net/Transfinancial_Economics
Robert Searle —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.22.16.194 (talk) 18:02, 18 April 2008 (UTC)