Von Mises teaches us that "All Economics is rooted in Human Action," he calls this the science of Praxeology. Thereafter; Markets are best characterized as multi valued reference spaces;
He talks about the impossibility of econometrics, he surmises; rightfully that no statistics can measure the future impact of the hand of man; his needs wants and desires and ultimately his choices. The following paper is an admission that in fact Econometrics has engaged in producing fiction, by way of ignoring missing information, thereby conclusive outcomes might appear valid up to the point that outside bandwidth is applied and exposes the half truths.
economics.utoronto.ca
In our time; economists attempt to model everything; with the goal to frame a statistical foundation for whatever surmise their efforts endow. From: Tim Fowler 4/6/2010 7:22:17 PM
"...As you may know, I don’t think much of the official methodology in macroeconomics. Many of my fellow economists seem to have a Popperian view of the social sciences. You develop a model. You go out and get some data. And then you try to refute the model with some sort of regression analysis. If you can’t refute it, then the model is assumed to be supported by the data, although papers usually end by noting “further research is necessary,” as models can never really be proved, only refuted.
My problem with this view is that it doesn’t reflect the way macro and finance actually work. Instead the models are often data-driven. Journals want to publish positive results, not negative. So thousands of macroeconomists keep running tests until they find a “statistically significant” VAR model, or a statistically significant “anomaly” in the EMH. Unfortunately, because the statistical testing is often used to generate the models, and determine which get published, the tests of statistical significance are meaningless..."
The whole truth is contained herein.
Message # 3818 from dvdw© at 8/5/2018 8:12:03 AM
Authentic intelligence casts and characterizes data of the market into its proper place. Objective observation sorts it all out. This thread has done the heavy lifting in defense of Supply and Demand for shares, characterized by the actions of market participants.
All prices remain artifacts of some prevailing systems intent. Knowing about total outstanding and free floats becomes foundational to understanding how disconnect prices have become when spurious correlations have replaced true facts about the status of shares.
To this end Pensinger writes;
Look, if F. A. von Hayek's Everettian notion, the “time-shapes of total capital stock”, is correct -- and it almost certainly is from all but the most myopic of Newtonian perspectives -- then there also are the time-shapes of total supersystem-system-subsystem risk and exchange-value over total capital stock. Description of each and all of these would require a linear-time independent (and “transcendental” in the N. H. Abel sense) quantum wave equation -- and domain decomposition of the supersystem-system-subsystem composite would require topologically active quantal operator-time as fundamental enabler of the quantum potential in the relative-state of the time-shapes of total capital stock. Von Hayek time-shapes here replace the idea of multiple universes falsely attributed to Hugh Everett's paradigm-bursting notion, “relative-state”. This means there are different “phases” (e.g., in simile to solid, liquid, gas, supersolid, superconductor, et cetera) of capital, risk, and exchange-value, that these three -- like massenergy -- cannot actually be created or destroyed, only undergo phase changes or be transferred through supersystem-system-subsystem composite by topological operations of temporal curl. Derivatives (a subliminal projective-identification parody of fiber-bundle arithmetics and a regressed inversion of the domain decomposition methods in numerical analysis, i.e., calculus), for instance, not only concentrate and transfer risk from subsystem to system to supersystem, they do so by changing the phase of exchange-value from, say, “solid” to “liquid” (which change is presently viewed by economists working exclusively with passive, referential linear-time as “creation of liquidity”). But the volume and supersystemic concentration of derivative liquidity is not the only thing about derivatives bound to drown central bank initiatives at exchange-value phase change (e.g., “printing” of fiat money); there is also the base-state “holding time” factor and the velocity, acceleration, and time rate of change of acceleration of the liquidity “created” by phase-change operations (enabled by 3-fold temporal curl's topological transforms over von Hayek total capital stock on a Lukasiewiczian m-logically-valued referencing Hilbert space). Liquidity is presently looked at primarily in terms of types and volumes, the dynamical aspects being very much relatively neglected. Even in a 1T2-valued logical framework (as is our current nonsystem monetary system -- no authentic supersystem-system-subsystem composite) there are at least Cartesian vertical and horizontal boundary value problems, transfer rates, rates of such rates, and rates of rates of such rates relatively neglected, these nested rates determining various topological properties of the composite. |
