Introduction to papers on stochastic processes

Steindl, Josef

Bibliographic data

Works

Document type:: Works

Collection:: Josef Steindl Collection

Title:: Introduction to papers on stochastic processes

Author:: Steindl, Josef

Scope:: Typoskript, Kopie, 3 Blätter

Year of publication:: 1989

Source material date:: [vermutlich um 1989]

Language:: English

Description:: The following papers on stochastic processes have been separated from the others because their prospective readers are presumably a separate class, too. I do not like it this way, though. I would rather like to bridge the gap between the two subsets of my readers and to convey to them the fundamental unity of purpose and outlook of my endeavours. (excerpt, p. 1)

Note:: Titel fingiert. Text eine frühe Fassung der Einleitung für den Teil "Stochastic Processes" in den "Economic Papers". Hier als Teil II betitelt, in der Endfassung Teil IV.

Related work:: Steindl, Josef: Introduction. In: Steindl, Josef: Economic Papers 1941-88. London: Macmillan, 1990, S. 319-320

JEL Classification:: C46 [Specific Distributions, Specific Statistics]

Shelfmark:: S/M.58.2

Access:: Free access

1 PART II INTRODUCTION The following papers on stochastic processes have been separated from the others because their prospective readers are presumably a separate class, too. I do not like it this way, though. I would rather like to bridge the gap between the two subsets of my readers and to convey to them the fundamental unity of purpose and outlook of my endeavours. Why do I use an approach which offers such overwhelming technical difficulties and yet requires, if anything,even more simplification than ordinary deterministic models? My aim in this type of work is a seemingly modest one:I want the economist to take a new look, with different eyes,as it were, at the statistical material which so far they have very often interpreted with a disarming naivete. Perhaps I may give an example. Some economists- a good many years ago, it is true, have been puzzled by the fact that time series and cross section data give different results when they are used, for example, to estimate the propensity to consume. They put forward all kinds of fancy explanations but they did not ask the obvious question why an identity of these two kinds of measurement should be expected at all. They might have tried to link the question to a closely related problem in statistical mechanics: The ergodic theorem which deals with the equality of "phase averages’* and ’’time averages” ; this theorem is valid only

Works

Cite and reuse

Works

Image

Image fragment

Citation links

Citation recommendation