Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Botnst
Yep and you're riding the bleeding edge of ecological theory ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrying_capacity).
There has been some excellent theoretical work from a biological perspective (reductionist science). Interestingly, some theoretical ecologists have recently (10 years or so) begun playing with econometrics. Originally they moved that way so that they could attach a commercial value to wild things, in hopes of convincing people of economical value if they don't believe in the intrinsic value of life. That is still in play but so are the tools and theories that economists have been working on for decades. To further complicate things, theoretical physicists who have had trouble getting jobs in pure physics have found applications in trading stocks and bonds, modeling extremely complex, sometimes chaotic trading is close enough to physics that they shift over rather well. |
It seems that the proof for the theoretical physicists moving into stocks, bonds and economics would be the monetary success therein. Has anyone who has made this shift actually succeeded in making money? If so, that would lend some quantifiable proof to the complex theories which they are modeling.
My guess is that there are still too many variables to quantify and track when dealing with homo sapiens sapiens - not your standard ecological niche/predator population scenario in which carrying capacities can be accuratly determined.