Can we say that?

Mackinn · November 17th, 2002, 4:47 pm

Hi, Can I understand Finance theory like the following ? No further dramatic advancement in finance theory would have been made without resoting to the development of natural science, especially mathematics and physics, and engineering techniques, and economics theory are the most fundamental to the finance theory. Thanks !Mackinn

David · November 17th, 2002, 6:10 pm

Yes, but not heartily.......

WaaghBakri · November 17th, 2002, 6:45 pm

It is but natural that the flow of known techniques & thinking from different sciences will rush in to fill a need in an emerging science. But at somepoint it could very well reverse. I'm not a pro in finance, but if I recall correctly I have read statements to the effect that a lot of the martingale related research was finance driven. Don't quote me on this though .... perhaps some pro will confirm or dispel the above ...

Mackinn · November 18th, 2002, 2:40 am

But how can we accurately describe the relationship between them? I think finance is a eveloved from economics, in some way, a branch of economics. And its evolvement depends greatly on natural science and engineering. For instance, stochastic process besed on the theory of Brownian Motion and the fractals, and the application of chaos theory in finance has been greatly depended on the other research fields' development. Is that right?

WaaghBakri · November 18th, 2002, 4:31 am

In haste, my choice of words were'nt right. I really should'nt say "it could very well reverse," and I did'nt mean that. What I should say is "exchange" or something similar....