Re: [OPE-L] equilibrium and simultaneous vs. sequential determination

From: Paul Cockshott (wpc@DCS.GLA.AC.UK)
Date: Fri Sep 14 2007 - 15:14:03 EDT

Next message: Fred Moseley: "Re: [OPE-L] Truncating Marx"
Previous message: glevy@PRATT.EDU: "[OPE-L] The Last Letter of Kurt Richebacher"
In reply to: Ian Wright: "Re: [OPE-L] equilibrium and simultaneous vs. sequential determination"
Next in thread: Riccardo Bellofiore: "Re: [OPE-L] Truncating Marx's "Capital""
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

 fair comment, I should have mentioned discrete time steps
Paul Cockshott

www.dcs.gla.ac.uk/~wpc



-----Original Message-----
From: OPE-L on behalf of Ian Wright
Sent: Fri 9/14/2007 4:44 PM
To: OPE-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU
Subject: Re: [OPE-L] equilibrium and simultaneous vs. sequential determination
 
Paul

> Fred surely this is just an artefact of the fact that Sraffa uses
> difference equations rather than the full formalism of differential
> calculus.

Sraffa doesn't use difference equations in PCMC. Perhaps you meant
something else?

Best,
-Ian.

Next message: Fred Moseley: "Re: [OPE-L] Truncating Marx"
Previous message: glevy@PRATT.EDU: "[OPE-L] The Last Letter of Kurt Richebacher"
In reply to: Ian Wright: "Re: [OPE-L] equilibrium and simultaneous vs. sequential determination"
Next in thread: Riccardo Bellofiore: "Re: [OPE-L] Truncating Marx's "Capital""
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Sep 30 2007 - 00:00:05 EDT