Can the elegant models of mathematics and physics be applied to something so intrinsically complicated as the economic behavior of individuals? When economist Paul Krugman argued in The New York Times Magazine last week that the failure of economists to predict the current economic crisis was due to their reliance on beautiful but flawed models of perfect markets, mathematician and hedge fund manager Eric Weinstein immediately tweeted his disagreement, asking ScienceBloggers Chad Orzel and Dave Bacon for their takes as well. Chad brought his experience with physics to bear, while Dave offered a few words of advice: “Retreat not, economists, from the shouting hordes of anti-math naysayers at the gates, but head over to your physics, computer science, and math departments.” Steinn Sigurðsson and Mike the Mad Biologist also weighed in on the article.
- Beauty’s Just Another Word I’m Never Certain How to Spell on Uncertain Principles
- Weinstein v. Krugman v. Orzel (Mathematical Elegance Death Match) on The Quantum Pontiff
- Economical with the Astronomical on The Dynamics of Cats
- Economics, Evolutionary Biology, and the Triumph of Data: Krugman Is Missing Part of the Story on Mike the Mad Biologist
- Economics: Does It All Come Down to Those Stupid F-cking Natural History Facts? on Mike the Mad Biologist
- Weekend Essay Links: Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty. . . Or is it? on bioephemera