May 15, 2015

What scientists in all ages knew

Comment on Lars Syll on ‘Why the ergodic theorem is not applicable in economics’


“The bifurcation of motion into two fundamentally different types, one for natural motions of non-living objects and another for acts of human volition ... is obviously related to the issue of free will, and demonstrates the strong tendency of scientists in all ages to exempt human behavior from the natural laws of physics, and to regard motions resulting from human actions as original, in the sense that they need not be attributed to other motions.” (Brown, 2011, p. 211)

It is a bit strange that economists, who after more than 200 years still cannot tell the difference between profit and income and have still not realized that utility and equilibrium are NONENTITIES like dancing angels on a pinpoint, lecture physicists about the ‘intersubjective transfiguration of classical Newtonian principles guided by general relativity’s equivalence principle.’

Orthodoxy is odd enough and Heterodoxy should not strive to surpass what will be footnoted in the history of ideas as an embarrassing scientific aberration.

Egmont Kakarot-Handtke

Brown, K. (2011). Reflections on Relativity. Raleigh: