3 ms·

"Physicists can intelligently contribute to economics" Someone should submit a link of an example; this does not do so any more than a blog rant about the "glo

"Physicists can intelligently contribute to economics" Someone should submit a link of an example; this does not do so any more than a blog rant about the "global warming hoax" contributes to climatology.

deleted 17y ago
[deleted]
- Semiapies 17y ago
  You seem to be misreading what I wrote, above. That or you might need to RTFA and compare what Einstein is saying with a discussion of economics.
  - deleted 17y ago
    [deleted]
Anon84 17y ago
You mean like the 2000 Nobel prize in Economics? The deficiencies in my college preparatory training were quickly made up, and at age 19, I received a B.S. in Physics with highest honors. I continued my studies in physics as a graduate student at Minnesota, but was strongly attracted to the study of human behavior. http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economics/laureates/2000/mcfadden-autobio.html http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economics/laureates/2000/...
- deleted 17y ago
  [deleted]
- Semiapies 17y ago
  Exactly. That's actual contribution to a field of knowledge, not a political essay.
deleted 17y ago
[deleted]
MaysonL 17y ago
von Neumann on game theory. QED. (the other QED).
- deleted 17y ago
  [deleted]
- Semiapies 17y ago
  I assume you mean quod erat demonstrandum, which normally goes at the end of a proof. The only thing you've helped prove, as requested, is that there are far better stories about physicists and economics to submit here than a political essay by Albert Einstein. :)
  - nlabs 17y ago
    of course, but the guy who posted the essay it did so to show off a critique of captialism. An appropriate response is then to say why Einstein is wrong, not attack his credibility by making it akin to JM Keynes commenting on QED (as Keynes is clearly not qualified to comment on QED).
    - Semiapies 17y ago
      No. Einstein is championing a system shown not to work. Why should I spend any more time refuting that in 2010 than I would trying to counter some old essay by an economist on the luminiferous aether?

deleted 17y ago

[deleted]

Semiapies 17y ago
You seem to be misreading what I wrote, above. That or you might need to RTFA and compare what Einstein is saying with a discussion of economics.
- deleted 17y ago
  [deleted]

Anon84 17y ago

You mean like the 2000 Nobel prize in Economics? The deficiencies in my college preparatory training were quickly made up, and at age 19, I received a B.S. in Physics with highest honors. I continued my studies in physics as a graduate student at Minnesota, but was strongly attracted to the study of human behavior. http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economics/laureates/2000/mcfadden-autobio.html http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economics/laureates/2000/...

deleted 17y ago
[deleted]
Semiapies 17y ago
Exactly. That's actual contribution to a field of knowledge, not a political essay.

deleted 17y ago

[deleted]

MaysonL 17y ago

von Neumann on game theory. QED. (the other QED).

deleted 17y ago
[deleted]
Semiapies 17y ago
I assume you mean quod erat demonstrandum, which normally goes at the end of a proof. The only thing you've helped prove, as requested, is that there are far better stories about physicists and economics to submit here than a political essay by Albert Einstein. :)
- nlabs 17y ago
  of course, but the guy who posted the essay it did so to show off a critique of captialism. An appropriate response is then to say why Einstein is wrong, not attack his credibility by making it akin to JM Keynes commenting on QED (as Keynes is clearly not qualified to comment on QED).
  - Semiapies 17y ago
    No. Einstein is championing a system shown not to work. Why should I spend any more time refuting that in 2010 than I would trying to counter some old essay by an economist on the luminiferous aether?