Serving the Quantitative Finance Community

 
User avatar
twofish
Topic Author
Posts: 0
Joined: February 18th, 2005, 6:51 pm

Journals from physicist perspective

December 27th, 2006, 4:37 pm

I've been looking through a number of quantitative finance journals, and I was wondering if there are any that write articles using either "physicist style" or "application developer style." The journals I've seen are either written from a mathematician's viewpoint (theorem and proofs) or from a finance viewpoint (minimal math and what there is assumes a preexisting model rather than developing one). There are a number of books that are written from the viewpoint of a physicist (Rebanto, Navin, Dash, etc. etc.) but I was wondering if there are any journals that have the same sort of style.
 
User avatar
dopeman
Posts: 0
Joined: May 9th, 2006, 9:42 pm

Journals from physicist perspective

December 28th, 2006, 12:13 am

Articles in the journal "Quantitative Finance" are mostly written in physicists' style.
 
User avatar
unkpath
Posts: 0
Joined: January 13th, 2004, 8:44 pm

Journals from physicist perspective

December 28th, 2006, 12:52 am

dude, how is that in any sense relevant?I am always amazed by people who think that you can just pick a language, connect up with a research field and then crank the paper handle... those who do that are wrong imho. you make it sound as if journals and books are legitimate because they are writtenin a particular language and reflect the existence of their authorship - that's just blow man come on.there is just one finance; it is not like there is a physicist's finance, a mathematician'sfinance, etc.... all just blow dude. the only thing that counts is what people can make a useful contribution at a given time. those who can recognize this make the move in at the right time and the move out, too btw when the time comes....
 
User avatar
NorthernJohn
Posts: 0
Joined: June 2nd, 2003, 9:07 am

Journals from physicist perspective

December 29th, 2006, 8:53 pm

QuoteOriginally posted by: unkpathdude, how is that in any sense relevant?...Er, because it is a style that he (and I) are most comfortable reading?You have read an awful lot into the request that was really not there.So, tell me about your mother...
 
User avatar
ZmeiGorynych
Posts: 6
Joined: July 10th, 2005, 11:46 am

Journals from physicist perspective

December 31st, 2006, 8:59 am

QuoteOriginally posted by: unkpaththere is just one finance; it is not like there is a physicist's finance, a mathematician'sfinance, etc....New to academe are you?
 
User avatar
N
Posts: 0
Joined: May 9th, 2003, 8:26 pm

Journals from physicist perspective

January 1st, 2007, 12:08 am

fish,Most physics and math journals are very similar. In fact, it's usually hard to tell the difference unless there's expermental results. They're mostly excellent.I can't say I like the quality of finance journals though. They are usually cover to cover 'junk' math.As a rule, I focus on math journals.N
 
User avatar
unkpath
Posts: 0
Joined: January 13th, 2004, 8:44 pm

Journals from physicist perspective

January 1st, 2007, 1:05 pm

QuoteNew to academe are you? errh, sorry to disappoint you, have probably been, cruised and thought about it a little more than you. no offense intended. NJ, I actually share your preference for physicists' laguage over rigorous mathematicians'language, but that is hardly the point. There is a lot to say about this. For instance, if it isthe case that the majority of derivatives mathematics papers that matter are written in language closer to mathematics, you might try to think a little harder and look for the cause,rather than close your eyes and look for stuff written in language you actually understand. I can give you examples from several fields of science where researchers with various backgrounds and specializations entered, published and exited and there was always a good reason for this. Smart people will notice and enter and exit at the right time. But let'sstick to finance. That is the interdisciplinarity works.Have you heard of econophysics for instance? That is a one time event where physicists ridiculed themselves quite dramatically. The websites are still out there if you want to check. Anyway, my initial reaction to twofish's post was just to attract his attention to the fact that I think he is looking for the wrong thing in the right field. It is totally irrelevant to look for what journal is written in what language. The only thing that counts is what matters in a field now and in the future. Once you figure this out, it is up to you to learn whatever it takes to be able to follow. Given his background in physics he should know this.
 
User avatar
twofish
Topic Author
Posts: 0
Joined: February 18th, 2005, 6:51 pm

Journals from physicist perspective

January 1st, 2007, 4:09 pm

QuoteOriginally posted by: NorthernJohnQuoteOriginally posted by: unkpathdude, how is that in any sense relevant?...Er, because it is a style that he (and I) are most comfortable reading?It's actually not so much reading than writing. Basically, getting some publications out might be useful for getting credibility in academia, and while I don't have any problems reading mathematical or finance papers, I'd have some difficulty mastering the writing style in either mathematics or finance whereas I know more or less how to write a paper in physics style. Mathematics papers require much more nit-picking cross-your-t's and dot-your-i's discipline than I have, and finance papers generally require you to have references to thirty other papers describe a particular concept. The problem with both mathematics and finance papers is that I read them, and then think to myself "so what does any of this have to do with reality?"
 
User avatar
twofish
Topic Author
Posts: 0
Joined: February 18th, 2005, 6:51 pm

Journals from physicist perspective

January 1st, 2007, 4:24 pm

QuoteOriginally posted by: unkpathQuoteNew to academe are you? Anyway, my initial reaction to twofish's post was just to attract his attention to the fact that I think he is looking for the wrong thing in the right field. It is totally irrelevant to look for what journal is written in what language.Before assuming what I'm looking for you might want to ask :-) :-) :-) :-)Anyway, I'm trying to limit myself as far as what journals to read, I'm trying to get a list of journals in which I can get something published with the minimal amount of effort so that I have something on my CV so that I can get more money and power. Trying to write a paper in a language that you are not used to in a community where you have few common philosophical points of agreement just adds another layer of difficulty in what is already a difficult process.This is particularly a problem if you are trying to do anything interdisciplinary. It's really easy to fall through the cracks between fields, and it's a huge challenge to be able to communicate what you are trying to do to some social network that you can attach yourself to.QuoteThe only thing that counts is what matters in a field now and in the future. Once you figure this out, it is up to you to learn whatever it takes to be able to follow. Given his background in physics he should know this.Money and power matter a lot. Money and power in both business and academia come from social networks and relationships, and social networks and relationships come from things like community respect, and one way of getting that is by publishing peer-reviewed papers. Once you have money and power, you can to a large extent influence what matters in a field.
 
User avatar
twofish
Topic Author
Posts: 0
Joined: February 18th, 2005, 6:51 pm

Journals from physicist perspective

January 1st, 2007, 4:27 pm

QuoteOriginally posted by: Nfish,Most physics and math journals are very similar. In fact, it's usually hard to tell the difference unless there's expermental results. They're mostly excellent.Physics and math styles of argumentation are very different. The moment someone uses the word "theorem" in a paper followed by a paragraph marked "proof" I know that there is a mathematician talking. Physicists talk in terms of models, and the second someone uses an "analogy" or "physical example" then you know its a physicist talking and not a mathematician.
 
User avatar
torontosimpleguy
Posts: 0
Joined: July 12th, 2004, 5:51 pm

Journals from physicist perspective

January 2nd, 2007, 8:48 pm

Those your observations can be explained objectively.Math perspective: body of knowledge is based on basic axioms. Math theories are built from the bottom up.Physical perspective: body of knowledge is based on physical laws of nature. Physical theories are tied to the basic laws and verified experimentally.Financial perspective: body of knowledge is based on consensus. Financial theories are based on common sense and should produce consistent and economically meaningful results.
 
User avatar
twofish
Topic Author
Posts: 0
Joined: February 18th, 2005, 6:51 pm

Journals from physicist perspective

January 3rd, 2007, 3:07 pm

QuoteOriginally posted by: torontosimpleguyThose your observations can be explained objectively.Math perspective: body of knowledge is based on basic axioms. Math theories are built from the bottom up.Physical perspective: body of knowledge is based on physical laws of nature. Physical theories are tied to the basic laws and verified experimentally.Financial perspective: body of knowledge is based on consensus. Financial theories are based on common sense and should produce consistent and economically meaningful results.On a bad day:Mathematicians can spend endless amounts of time studying axioms which have no connection to realityFinance people can create a consensus in which everyone tells everyone else how they are right and are hostile to anyone that challenges the prevailing wisdom.On a good day:Mathematicians can provide theoretical rigor and point out unexpected connections and logical implications. Finance people can point out unexpected applications and look at the big picture. Also on a good day, finance people are open to new ideas that will make them $$$$$.(and then there are econometrics and dozens of schools of economists).
Last edited by twofish on January 2nd, 2007, 11:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.