RT @AnthonyLeeZhang: Largely agree with Ben's points here, some other thoughts... In physics, mathematical models are either basically cor…
RT @AnthonyLeeZhang: Largely agree with Ben's points here, some other thoughts... In physics, mathematical models are either basically cor…
RT @EdgardoTempore1: Quien andaba acá el otro día hablando de ergodicidad???
Quien andaba acá el otro día hablando de ergodicidad???
Great thread on the history of expected utility theory and why it is important to add subject- experts reviewers. Kudos to @NaturePhysics for including this reply.
One of the few things more annoying than economists is physicists doing this https://t.co/cgonCKltEl
RT @Noahpinion: Thread. A rebuttal to the "ergodicity economics" of Ole Peters.
RT @AnthonyLeeZhang: Largely agree with Ben's points here, some other thoughts... In physics, mathematical models are either basically cor…
RT @jasndoc: Hello #econtwitter ! Recently several physicists have suggested that economists (and psychologists) have an incorrect concept…
RT @ben_golub: A polite, scathing, and comprehensive reply by @jasndoc and coauthors to the "ergodicity economics" of @ole_b_peters. @Natu…
RT @jasndoc: Hello #econtwitter ! Recently several physicists have suggested that economists (and psychologists) have an incorrect concept…
Exactly 👇
RT @AnthonyLeeZhang: Largely agree with Ben's points here, some other thoughts... In physics, mathematical models are either basically cor…
This piece is made all the more topical by being authored by Dr. Doctor et al.
RT @AnthonyLeeZhang: Largely agree with Ben's points here, some other thoughts... In physics, mathematical models are either basically cor…
There is a tendency among critics of economics to listen favorably to every criticism of the mainstream. I think this has led many to think ergodicity economics is worthwhile. TZhis thread appears to debunk a lot of the claims made by ergodicity economists
RT @albertobisin: Thanks @ben_golub. At some point I was asked to review a book (I think - or a long essay) by @ole_b_peters on what he cal…
RT @ShengwuLi: Economists should be open to new ideas from other fields. But ideas take time and attention to digest, and there’s an advers…
@ole_b_peters @NaturePhysics People have published thoughtful and detailed critiques -- now your turn to read and think about them. https://t.co/yCW2UjHE9z
found this very helpful.
Big "can you just go to the slide with the Bellman equation" energy
👏
RT @AnthonyLeeZhang: Largely agree with Ben's points here, some other thoughts... In physics, mathematical models are either basically cor…
This seems to continue a trend of economists delivering "scathing" rebuttals of things they don't like (MMT, Ergodicity Economics) that turn out to be nothing but strawmanning and hand-waving. https://t.co/yb4WuZT1vM
@ole_b_peters EE got destroyed here: https://t.co/9GEYvxfwpN
RT @Noahpinion: Thread. A rebuttal to the "ergodicity economics" of Ole Peters.
An excellent paper and thread on “Ergodicity Economics.”
Good critique of the ergodicity in econ paper that made the rounds last year. Worth reading both the response paper and thread. Peters' paper is worth reading too IMO--its model is interesting--just with appropriate context that it doesn't invalidate wid
RT @AnthonyLeeZhang: Largely agree with Ben's points here, some other thoughts... In physics, mathematical models are either basically cor…
RT @albertobisin: Thanks @ben_golub. At some point I was asked to review a book (I think - or a long essay) by @ole_b_peters on what he cal…
Thanks @ben_golub. At some point I was asked to review a book (I think - or a long essay) by @ole_b_peters on what he calls the ergodicity pb. I did not have time to do it well but quickly convinced myself that he had no understanding of expected utility .
RT @AnthonyLeeZhang: Largely agree with Ben's points here, some other thoughts... In physics, mathematical models are either basically cor…
RT @Noahpinion: Thread. A rebuttal to the "ergodicity economics" of Ole Peters. https://t.co/5SwsUuGj60
Fantastically put:
RT @AnthonyLeeZhang: Largely agree with Ben's points here, some other thoughts... In physics, mathematical models are either basically cor…
RT @ben_golub: A polite, scathing, and comprehensive reply by @jasndoc and coauthors to the "ergodicity economics" of @ole_b_peters. @Natu…
Ping @mtmalinen
Thread. A rebuttal to the "ergodicity economics" of Ole Peters.
RT @ShengwuLi: Economists should be open to new ideas from other fields. But ideas take time and attention to digest, and there’s an advers…
@threadreaderapp unroll thread
RT @PietroOrtoleva: A long-needed reply. What is absurd is that such reply was even needed.
Great response justifying expected utility theory
RT @PietroOrtoleva: A long-needed reply. What is absurd is that such reply was even needed.
bel thread riguarda una controversia tra economisti che utilizzano la teoria della utilità in condizioni incertezza basata sul calcolo delle probabilità con certe assunzioni su distribuzioni normali (generalmente) ed una recente critica alla stessa basata
A long-needed reply. What is absurd is that such reply was even needed.
A great thread and a great article.
Dumbest thing about the EE guys is that their proposed solution is just a special case of the supposed problem... and one that has been shown to not explain many economic phenomena. A lot going on here, but this thread is a good summary
“Kicking a person is not like kicking a rock.”
A nice thread on a recent debate between Econ and physics:
RT @ShengwuLi: Economists should be open to new ideas from other fields. But ideas take time and attention to digest, and there’s an advers…
RT @ShengwuLi: Economists should be open to new ideas from other fields. But ideas take time and attention to digest, and there’s an advers…
RT @ShengwuLi: Economists should be open to new ideas from other fields. But ideas take time and attention to digest, and there’s an advers…
Economists should be open to new ideas from other fields. But ideas take time and attention to digest, and there’s an adverse selection problem. (Good ideas are difficult and rare, crank critiques are free.) As a hobby, @ben_golub provides a detection mech
physics != economics
RT @ben_golub: A polite, scathing, and comprehensive reply by @jasndoc and coauthors to the "ergodicity economics" of @ole_b_peters. @Natu…
This thread is not even done yet, and I can already tell I'm going to enjoy reading it.
A polite, scathing, and comprehensive reply by @jasndoc and coauthors to the "ergodicity economics" of @ole_b_peters. @NaturePhysics erred in not finding a referee who would ask these basic questions of the authors, but glad a reply is out there. https:/
In our recent paper, in @NaturePhysics we are critical of EE for many of the reasons outlined by @ben_golub. It is faithful to only a narrow subset of preferences. https://t.co/Tnu29JSU5m https://t.co/GT0rvAzqyC
@EmanuelDerman @einselection TBH I have yet to see a convincing counterargument. I can't find one in here https://t.co/18pB3IV9kd but I am looking forward to @EE_2021 to listen to Peter Wakker explain.
@JessicaHullman Me neither and I am interested to hear such arguments, too. I don't find any convincing argument in https://t.co/1mSy7TJJIS
Economists’ views on the ergodicity problem https://t.co/sPRgs2KCdw via @NaturePhysics
Matters Arising by Jason N. Doctor, Peter P. Wakker & Tong V. Wang | Economists’ views on the ergodicity problem https://t.co/oZGJSqeZa9
We develop a general thought experiment behind this example in the supplement to show that ergodicity fails for a whole class of decision problems (https://t.co/eBXAKSBnvS ) (6/n)
Hello #econtwitter ! Recently several physicists have suggested that economists (and psychologists) have an incorrect conception of probability. We address this in @NaturePhysics "Matters Arising" published today. The paper linkis here: https://t.co/Tn