Indeed!  Eternal inflation is evidence the universe has one of those eternally damned central banks that gets ppoops in a lather.  Eternal inflation can be cured if the universe simply switches to the gold standard. Or in the case of tulips, nip it in the bud. Yes, that's better than being led down...

Posting certain types of content to threads does not imply endorsement.  Just circulation of ideas and things to discuss. :D OK, you want to wind (some of) us up? LOL Indeed!  Eternal inflation is evidence the universe has one of those eternally damned central banks that gets ppoops in a lather.  E...

trackstar wrote:

Cuchulainn wrote:

aka quantum mysticism as in Wikipedia.

In my day we only had eternal damnation. We had something to live for.

Posting certain types of content to threads does not imply endorsement.  Just circulation of ideas and things to discuss.

:D

OK, you want to wind (some of) us up? LOL

aka quantum mysticism as in Wikipedia.

In my day we only had eternal damnation. We had something to live for.

Lots of noise here. My comments was directed at the first attachment where you claim to truncate the domains for r and u at 0, and setting the corresponding bond prices P1 and P2 equal to 1. That is entirely inconsistent with a Gaussian interest rate model. I see. So you are saying the PDE should b...

Did Julian watch the rugby?

BTW, we have not done domains for negative r, u. Is that useful/necessary?

Aside from degenerate cases there is obviously no closed form solution for “Bermudan Bonds” (I am assuming this means a callable bond) in any non-trivial model. I am perfectly happy to use PDE methods to solve interest rate valuation problems but much prefer models where the boundary conditions can...

As an exercise in comparing numerical PDE methods it may not matter much, but truncating both r and u at zero will certainly not produce results consistent with the 2-factor HW model, which is just a particular (and not terribly useful) way to write down a slightly restricted version of the...

ppauper wrote:

cuch, I can only see the first image, the second one is just showing a long string of gibberish

See the ma and pa blackboard

How will this field develop in the coming 0.5, 1, 2, 5, 10,15, 30 years?

I also find the lack of hard evidence presented to the public worrying. Maybe the UK government has a lot of hard evidence pointing at Russia, but (differently from Russia) we are a democracy. They should not risk an open conflict with a major world power without presenting the evidence to the publ...