From: ajit sinha (sinha_a99@YAHOO.COM)
Date: Mon Sep 10 2007 - 07:57:00 EDT
I'm attaching a draft paper written by my colleague and myself on gravitation mechanism. I think it is directly relevant to 90% of the debate on this list. We would welcome all critical as well as 'friendly' comments: The abstract is given below: In this paper we use insights from Sraffa’s classic, PCMC, to argue that the classical notion of ‘centre of gravitation’ is not a sound concept. The market mechanics of labour allocation through price signals and quantity adjustments, given effectual demands, do not lead to a ‘centre of gravitation’. We work out all such possible market mechanisms, including the specific classical case, and show that the ‘centre of gravitation’ is a non-attractive point in all the cases. Cheers, ajit sinha --- Ian Wright <wrighti@ACM.ORG> wrote: > Hi Jerry > > I think that understanding "a complex dynamic > process in which there > are tendencies and counter-tendencies and *lots and > lots* of variables > (and hence uncertain outcomes)" requires a formal > (e.g. mathematical > or computational) approach. Natural language > theorizing can encompass > a lot of material without really getting to grips > with the underlying > causality. But there's room for many approaches. > > Best wishes, > -Ian. > ____________________________________________________________________________________ Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out. http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545469
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Sep 30 2007 - 00:00:05 EDT