Fundamental Equation of Economics

Wayne, James J. (2013): Fundamental Equation of Economics.

Abstract

Recent experience of the great recession of 2008 has renewed one of the oldest debates in economics: whether economics could ever become a scientific discipline like physics. This paper proves that economics is truly a branch of physics by establishing for the first time a fundamental equation of economics (FEOE), which is similar to many fundamental equations governing other subfields of physics, for example, Maxwell’s Equations for electromagnetism. From recently established physics laws of social science (PLSS), this paper derives a fundamental equation of economics, which is the one mathematic equation that governs all observed economic phenomena. FEOE establishes a common entry point to solve all economic problems without any exception. We show that establishing FEOE clarifies many open questions regarding the foundation of economics. For example, the number one question for all economists ought to be what can be forecasted and what cannot be forecasted in economics. Without FEOE and PLSS, this number one question cannot be answered scientifically within the existing framework of economics. While FEOE re-affirms many existing economic theories, we also have found that many other popular economic theories are not compatible with FEOE, and we conclude that FEOE comes with its own version of microeconomics and macroeconomics. In microeconomics, the framework of laws of supply and demand and market equilibrium, which is traditionally assumed by most economists as the foundation of economics, is replaced by a new model called indeterministic supply demand pricing (ISDP) model. ISDP model is far more precise and universal mathematical abstraction of market reality than the framework of Marshall’s market equilibrium and laws of supply and demand. In macroeconomics, a new macroeconomic model called indeterministic balance sheet plus (IBS+) model can be derived from FEOE. Unlike the popular DSGE and Agent-based Computational Economic (ACE) models, the IBS+ model is universally applicable in any kind of economy, empirically falsifiable, making forecasts with reasonable accuracy, truthful abstraction of reality, capturing macroeconomic dynamics accurately, and most importantly based on a sound theoretical foundation. In conclusion, this paper shows that FEOE provides a solid physics foundation for both theoretical and practical economics. Therefore, after establishing the fundamental equation of economics in this paper, there should be no doubt that economics is simply a branch of quantum physics in parallel with chemistry and optics. Over last four hundred years, there are many schools of thoughts emerged in economics while there is only one school of thought by Newton-Einstein-Bohr survived the experimental and theoretical scrutiny in physics over the same period. The logic conclusion is that there must be only one school of thought allowed in economics as a subfield of physics.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: causality, econophysics, economic forecast, laws of supply and demand, market equilibrium, macroeconomic model, laws of physics, physics laws of social science, fundamental equation of economics
• Subjects: A - General Economics and Teaching > A1 - General Economics > A12 - Relation of Economics to Other Disciplines; C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C1 - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General

References

1. Paul Krugman, 2009. “How did Economists Get it So Wrong?”, New York Times Sunday Magazine September 6, 2009

2. Mark Buchanan, 2013. “Is Economics a Science or a Religion?”, Bloomberg View July 17, 2013

3. Alex Rosenberg and Tyler Curtain, 2013, “What Is Economics Good For?”, New York Times August 25, 2013

4. James J. Wayne, 2005. “Physics Laws of Social Science”, Lawrence Cedar House

5. James J. Wayne, 2013. “Physics Laws of Social Science”, working paper, Munich University Library, Munich Personal RePEc Archive, 47811 (http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/47811/).

6. Leonard I. Schiff, 1968. “Quantum Mechanics”, McGraw-Hill Companies

7. Mark Kac, 1949. “On Distributions of Certain Wiener Functionals". Transactions of the American Mathematical Society 65 (1): 1–13

8. Robert H. Frank & Ben S. Bernanke, 2003. “Principles of Economics”, Irwin/McGraw

9. Steve Keen, 2011. “Debunking Economics: The Naked Emperor Dethroned?” London Zed Books

10. Joseph L. McCauley, 2003. “Thermodynamic Analogies in Economics and Finance: Instability of Markets.” Physica A, 329: 199-212

11. John R. Hicks, 1981. IS-LM: An Explanation, Journal of Post Keynesian Economics. 3: 139-54

12. Robert M. Solow, 2001. From Neoclassical Growth Theory to New Classical Macroeconomics, in: J. H.Drèze (ed.), “Advances in Macroeconomic Theory” New York: Palgrave.

13. Robert M. Solow, 2008. The State of Macroeconomics, The Journal of Economic Perspectives. 22: 243-46.

14. Steve Keen, 2011. “Debunking Macroeconomics” Economic Analysis & Policy, Vol 41, NO 3: 147-67

15. Roger B. Myerson, 1997. “Game Theory: Analysis of Conflict”, Harvard University Press

16. Roger B. Myerson, 2005. “Probability Models for Economic Decisions”, Thomson Brooke Cole, 2005

17. James R. Wright and Kevin Leyton-Brown, 2010. “Beyond Equilibrium: Predicting Human Behavior in Normal Form Game”, in Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-10): 902-907

18. James M. Buchanan and Gordon Tullock, 1962. “The calculus of Consent: Logical Foundation of Constitutional Democracy”, University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, MI.

19. James M. Buchanan, 1990. “The Domain of Constitutional Economics,” Constitutional Political Economy, 1(1): 1-18

20. Friedrich Hayek, 1944. “The Road to Serfdom”, University of Chicago Press, Chicago

21. Friedrich Hayek, 1952. “The Counter-revolution of Science: Studies on the Abuse of Reason”, Free Press, Glencoe, IL

22. Friedrich Hayek, 1960. “The Constitution of Liberty”, University of Chicago Press, Chicago