"Ergodicity economics" is not a new idea, as others have said. Peters' claims the contrary, and then claims to "destroy" a whole academic field with one fell s

"Ergodicity economics" is not a new idea, as others have said. Peters' claims the contrary, and then claims to "destroy" a whole academic field with one fell swoop. That's academic shitposting. That EUT is based on assumptions that have nothing to do with time is quite crucial, and one major misunderstanding. However, if you read on, you see that Peters makes other claims that don't hold up. Look at it from this side: Here comes someone trying to carve out a heterodox niche (he ain't the first), but he does it without actually discovering something new and without the proper care for or understanding of economic theory. This ruffles people's feathers.