The PDF reproductions of the two books introduced on the Home page are now available for downloading via page The Offer. No strings attached. Your feedback, however, will be appreciated.

3 Comments on “PDF reproductions available”

Hey lev—I decided to look at your page again; i didn’t notice before the 2 books were available for free. I skimmed both of them.

I am somewhat familiar with maybe half of the topics you discuss—ecological economics, the ecological footprint, universal basic income, modeling complex systems like an economy (or ecosystem, or chemical reacting system) using differential equations (deterministic or stochastic) and their discrete versions (eg difference equations), or using linear or nonlinear programming algorithms.

Some other approaches model complex systems using graph theory, or look at chaotic systems (eg when a differential equation does not have a unique equilibrium solution, or go into a cycle, or diverge to infinity), and even more recently from a statistical mechanics and ergodic theory view (‘econophysics’). There is a huge literature on this, some coming from the Santa Fe Institute. (Alot of the statistical mechanics literature originated in Russia, under Kolmogorov, Dobryshunin, and many others–but they mostly studied physical systems and math). Another approach is ‘Bayesian’ and is basically similar to statistical mechanics—due to E. T. Jaynes—sometimes called ‘maximum entropy’.
I can give references to alot of this literature—some is very technical, and is often published in mathematical economics journals.

I’d have a few comments. The concept of Universal Basic Income in various forms goes back in USA over 200 years. Some of the history of this is discussed on the various web sites/think tanks (eg CI) which deal with this. eg http://www.usbig.net

I think a modified version (updated) of the ecological footprint is the way to go to figure out ‘what a better organization’ is. There are quite a few proposals for this around —some by economics professors, or former econ profs—most seem to work by themselves, and don’t discuss related work. Alot of this to me is similar to evonomics—of very mixed quality, partly because people don’t cooperate.

The modifications of the ecological footprint have to do with how to include psychosocial variables into the footprint. ‘Behavioral economics’ deals with some of this, as does political psychology.

I wonder if you have shown your books to all the various people in academia or think tanks your book?

Academic papers I read are typically from 4 to 30 pages long, and usually have a few equations (or (too) many).

You and I have a direct connection. We can attend, working together, to any specific issue we may select, including one of those named in your comment. Our goal will be to produce an article worthy of a publication in a reputable periodical.

Hey lev—I decided to look at your page again; i didn’t notice before the 2 books were available for free. I skimmed both of them.

I am somewhat familiar with maybe half of the topics you discuss—ecological economics, the ecological footprint, universal basic income, modeling complex systems like an economy (or ecosystem, or chemical reacting system) using differential equations (deterministic or stochastic) and their discrete versions (eg difference equations), or using linear or nonlinear programming algorithms.

Some other approaches model complex systems using graph theory, or look at chaotic systems (eg when a differential equation does not have a unique equilibrium solution, or go into a cycle, or diverge to infinity), and even more recently from a statistical mechanics and ergodic theory view (‘econophysics’). There is a huge literature on this, some coming from the Santa Fe Institute. (Alot of the statistical mechanics literature originated in Russia, under Kolmogorov, Dobryshunin, and many others–but they mostly studied physical systems and math). Another approach is ‘Bayesian’ and is basically similar to statistical mechanics—due to E. T. Jaynes—sometimes called ‘maximum entropy’.

I can give references to alot of this literature—some is very technical, and is often published in mathematical economics journals.

I’d have a few comments. The concept of Universal Basic Income in various forms goes back in USA over 200 years. Some of the history of this is discussed on the various web sites/think tanks (eg CI) which deal with this. eg http://www.usbig.net

I think a modified version (updated) of the ecological footprint is the way to go to figure out ‘what a better organization’ is. There are quite a few proposals for this around —some by economics professors, or former econ profs—most seem to work by themselves, and don’t discuss related work. Alot of this to me is similar to evonomics—of very mixed quality, partly because people don’t cooperate.

The modifications of the ecological footprint have to do with how to include psychosocial variables into the footprint. ‘Behavioral economics’ deals with some of this, as does political psychology.

I wonder if you have shown your books to all the various people in academia or think tanks your book?

Academic papers I read are typically from 4 to 30 pages long, and usually have a few equations (or (too) many).

Hi Ishi,

Enjoy the reading! You touch on several topics. Give me some time to ponder over your comments.

Lev

Ishi,

You and I have a direct connection. We can attend, working together, to any specific issue we may select, including one of those named in your comment. Our goal will be to produce an article worthy of a publication in a reputable periodical.

Best regards,

Lev