úterý 3. března 2009

AWT and monetary economy

This post is a reaction to recent attempt of Prof. Dr. Lee Smolin to define economy on background of agent model of gauge invariance in article named Time and symmetry in models of economic markets (PDF), which is important for AWT by its consideration of Newtonian physics in explanation of economical models:

"It is apparent that time is treated in a way analogous to one aspect of its treatment in Newtonian physics. In classical mechanics, we say that time has been geometrized or spatialized in that the time coordinate is treated just like one of the other coordinates. Motion in a d dimensional space is treated as a geometrical curve in a d + 1 dimensional space. Following this, it is natural in Arrow-Debreu (model of an economy) to treat time the way space is treated. ... The prices are treated as being set at one time, so that goods to be delivered in the future may have a different price today than the same good delivered today. Making use of this, we can say that time, like space, is treated like just another feature of a commodity."

As a LQG proponent, Prof. Smolin avoids description of multidimensional and temporal aspects of this model. Therefore his general line of reasoning still appears somewhat formal/ad-hoced for me, but it still has a good meaning in the context of AWT, which considers the spatialized definition of time, too. By AWT every concept, including time is just a manifestation of nested gradients of Aether density. Despite wonderstricken irony of some comments, here exists many apparent analogies between evolution of life, inorganic matter or human society, including economy.

For example, we can experience a gradual inflation, which is an analogy the inflation in Linde's cosmology, where it is consequence of gradual increase of vacuum density. This increase corresponds the gravitational collapse of collapsar, whose interior the vacuum appears to be formed. From insintric perspective of observer, formed by density fluctuations of such environment the space-time would expand with distance in accordance to Hubble law. This is not so surprising, because economy is energy density driven, so it can be described by dynamics of particle environment. And the energy spreading in particle environment exhibits a gauge invariance by the same way, like geometry of vacuum and particle fields.

We can illustrate it by formation of monetary economy in context of cosmic inflation. At the very beginning no money existed at all - just the exchange of various kinds of goods. By the same way, like the exchange of gravitons at the very beginning of our Universe. By quantum field theory gravitons are considered as a dual particles, playing a role of both fermions, both bosons at the same time. In primitive communism society the good has played both the role of subject of material exchange, both energetic exchange at the same time.

As the density of energy/goods exchange increased, the system did undergo a phase transition as the result of spontaneous symmetry breaking, which was followed by specialization. A two kinds of particles - bosons and fermions - emerged during inflation by the same way, like the exchange of values has separated into exchange of material gods and exchange of money, i.e. energy and the monetary economic has appeared. As the result, the density of exchange density has increased remarkably inside of human society, because it's quite easy to transfer a big amount of value via money at distance.

Even evolution of monetary economy can be understood as a process of symmetry breaking of goods condensate. The goods in primitive communism society served both like subject of trade, both like subject of exchange by the same way, like gravitons were serving both like fermions and bosons. During evolution of society in Sumerian empire 3500 - 3000 BC has separated into money (a bosons) and a goods as such. Another degree of condensation (a hadronization) of money has occurred under evolution of more complex financial derivatives (stock exchange derivatives, swaps, forward rate agreements, etc.). From this point of view, formation of money and monetary economy evolution is just a repeating of the old well-tried practice of universe, not a human invention at all.

We can see many other analogies here. The exchanging of money is followed by exchange of material stuff or services in free market economy. The falling of matter into gravitating body is always followed by radiation of energy (an accretion radiation, the meteors or radiation of matter in magnetic field of magnetars are similar effects from this perspective). If the exchange of matter isn't balanced by radiation of energy - which occurs typically for very dense bodies with small surface - a gravitational collapse may occur. Now we are experiencing a financial crisis, i.e. gravitational collapse of stock markets of high density of energy exchange, we are saying, the financial market was overheated. This situation can be predicted by appearance of tiny fluctuations, in analogy to luminosity changes of giant bright stars before their collapse. Therefore the particle based theory can serve as a tool for predicting and avoidance of stock market crashes, which makes it significant from practical reasons.

Money should be understood as a mean of value in its abstract meaning here, not as a currency. We aren't exchanging money or goods in fact, but time/energy required for their earning. Which basically means, total value of money cannot exceed man-hours of people, who have produced them under given level of technology. This connection has an important consequences for macroeconomics and further evolution of human society, as we can demonstrate later. The nonlinear ("money are attracting/earning money") and quantum wave aspects of particle models in economy we will dispute later as well.

From AWT model follows, primitive communism society is dual to "laissez-faire" capitalism, they're indistinguishable by the same way like fermion and bosons inside of graviton quantum foam. Free market economy can exist just under strong incubator of government, which carefully removes all weak or strong mutations (a monopolies, for example). Just under these artificial situations market can remain freely driven by supply-demand equilibrium.

Because individuals aren't usually willing to see/pay their global needs, their personal motivations and intelligence compensate mutually like interactions inside of large system of particles. At sufficiently general level the silly particle models can describe market society quite well even under consideration of low number of dimensions. This is partially because free market economy can handle actual prices only, it doesn't reflect future - so it's principally metastable and it undergoes a business cycle by the same way, like perceived evolution of observable Universe.

Therefore monetary inflation is tightly related to central government and legal actions by the same way, like expansion of space-time. Gradual expansion inflation of Universe prohibits the Big Bang event to occur too often, so that intelligent life has a sufficient time to develop in it. By analogous way, to keep free market stable we are forced to allow some permanent dissipation in it - or we're risking a "big bang" event, i.e. market crash. This is usually done both by centrally driven legal interventions of government, both by anti-dumping policy of private companies.

11 komentářů:

  1. Probably you don't understand what the meaning of the word PHYSICS is and therefore you don't understand why so many people are calling your litterature pure nonsense.

  2. Physics is human invention. Whereas I'm interested about observable connections of observable reality. You can call it nonsense obstinately, but it still doesn't disprove such approach: these connections still exists here.

    And here's still many people, who are interested about it - so you stance is just a stance of certain group of people. No less, no more. In general, people tend to criticize, instead of compliment, so that the ratio 1:2 is nothing exceptional here.

    AWT explains, why intersubjective opinion of people is so polarized concerning the Aether concept. It connects dual parts of approach to thinking, inductive ("many to one" approach) and deductive ("one to many" approach) one. The people, who are good in intuitive thinking have problems with formal reasoning and vice-versa. Only few people can handle both of them well.

  3. "PURE NONSENSE" comment itself is a tautology (a scalar), which cannot be confirmed or refuted without implication vector. It just manifests a subjective stance, which is not supported by no relevant arguments, thus being non-scientific by its very nature.

    Mainstream oponents like Lubos Motl are often using such way of "argumentation" under hope, psychologic manipulation of another less experienced readers will ad more relevance to their stance (many is more then single). They apparently don't realize, if objective criterion of nonsensicality wouldn't exist, we could never distinguish virtually any claim from nonsense effectivelly.

    Fortunatelly, the lack of sense in predicate logic can be proven in reproducible (i.e. "scientific") way by demonstration, internally inconsistent claim can be interpreted by more then by single unique ways, which are contradicting mutually. Only such comment can be labelled a "nonsense".

    My understanding of word PHYSICS has nothing to do with such way of reasoning. I'm not required to know anything about physics, while I can still have truth about it. By more illustrative way, I'm not required to be a broddy hen to be able to distinguish an aged egg.

    Because criterion of "nonsensicality" exists, I don't see any reason, why the claim "IT'S NONSENSE" shouldn't be ALWAYS followed by proof of nonsensicality. If you cannot supply such evidence, or you're too lazy to do it, you're expected to shut up.

  4. "Mainstream oponents like Lubos Motl" What? Motl's blog in particular is a harsh rant against anything and anyone who dares question string theory. Smolin, among others, is called an idiot, imbecile and crackpot. Motl is mainstream ;)

  5. Sorry, the meaning of my sentence was supposed to be exactly opposite ("mainstream opponent" ≠ "opponent of majority").

    But you're right, Mr. Motl is a specific cathegory on its own by most of criterions.

  6. Anonymous.

    Now, I'm completely convinced that you has understood anything. Do you really expect that AWT was conceived with the same philosophy than the other physics theories? I'm sorry, but it's not the case. AWT is other manner to express the human creativity. A new manner to make science. Because of this, I consider the Zephir's blog as the best blog in his specie. If I had wanted to learn more about the more conventional theories, then I had looked for good books. Let me to remind you that AWT does not arise by the reason of necessity, but neither AWT was born by an unreasonable caprice.

  7. /*...AWT does not arise by the reason of necessity..*/

    By my understanding mainstream science is rather close to reformulation of physics in terms of (un)particle emergent model (compare the history section of this blog). Only the politics, general prejudices and adherence to formal models prohibits the most prominent scientists to promote this model openly, so I can utilize the space in reasoning, which the mainstream science has left abandoned willingly.


    Therefore I was able to brought some new ideas into Aether concept rather freely - but in general, mainstream scientists aren't stupid, they're just a way too carefull not to harm their personal carriers - because under their level of specialization they have more to lose then to obtain from their formally oriented community by open acceptation of Aether concept.

    From this reason, Aether promoters could rather gain from support of layman publicity, rater then from mainstream science community and this is an easily predictable evolution. Specialists are thinking in relatively close areas, so that people, who are collecting voluminous streaks of new level in understanding can obtain an evolutionary advantage.

    But this advantage is only temporal, because every new ideas will get formalized and elaborated in formal way less or more later just by formally thinking specialist. From this perspective, AWT is quite normal protoscience episode based on logical, rather then formal reasoning, i.e. the analogy of Galileo's reasoning of heliocentric model.

  8. Hi Zephir,

    For historical reasons, my new 'alias' will be El Cid instead of being Curious-AWT.


Poznámka: Komentáře mohou přidávat pouze členové tohoto blogu.