Hi Bruce!
Nice to hear from you!!
Your question in ope-l 4457 is for Andrew K. but I have also
"battling" with his numerical examples. I have different numbers for
Table 3 than you. Let me "reconstruct" Andrew's example:
---------------------------------------------------------------------
t Constant Produc- Weight VAdded Total Physical Unit
Capital tivity Value Output Value
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
0 512 0.5 1.0 128 640 320 2
1 640 0.625 1.0 128 768 480 1.6
2 768 0.78125 1.0 128 896 700 1.28
3 896 0.9765625 1.0 128 1024 1000 1.024
---------------------------------------------------------------------
So, productivity rises at 25% rate (col. 2). Since productivity =
physical output/total labor-value, I calculate physical output (not
given by Andrew) as productivity*total labor-value: (2)*(5). Unit
labor-value is total labor-value/physical output, shown in col. 7.
The latter differs from your series for "periods 0, 1, 2, 3,
[where] the value of the commodity is 2, 1.92, 1.792, 1.6384
respectively."
Besides this, in my "reconstruction" unit value in each period is
exactly 800f the precedent as would correspond given the rise of
25 0n productivity of labor from period to period. Obvious: Unit
labor-value is simply the inverse of the "productivity".
What is your method to calculate unit values?
Alejandro