News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Exponential Economist Meets Finite Physicist (2012) by lutorm on Wednesday May 29, 2019 @08:10PM (#20047072)
Yeah, as far as I understand, there's nothing preventing you and me just trading the same money back and forth at ever increasing speed, creating economic "growth" without physical limits.
Re:Exponential Economist Meets Finite Physicist (2012) by drdeca on Thursday May 30, 2019 @12:20AM (#20048357)
There are physical limits on how fast you can do that.

Bremermann's limit, (or some extension of it?), says that the minimum amount of time needed for a system with average energy E to change to an orthogonal state, is inversely proportional to E (specifically, pi * h_bar, all divided by 2E ).

So, assuming that “I have the money” and “you have the money” are orthogonal (collections of) states, then there is a maximum rate at which the system can switch between those states.

You might say “well, what if we just count the number of transactions that ‘should’ have happened, instead of counting the number of actual events where the money changes hands”, but that seems to obviously not reflect actual benefit?

If me and another person turn away from you, and then turn back, and claim that we exchanged ownership of a dollar bill I’m holding 2^64 times while we were facing away from you, the obvious response would be “no, you didn’t.”.

Re:Exponential Economist Meets Finite Physicist (2012) by sdenton4 on Thursday May 30, 2019 @06:49AM (#20049917)
Of course, we've seen a similar type of fiction already in the history of economics.

"This piece of paper represents a chunk of gold!"

"No, it doesn't."

Re:Exponential Economist Meets Finite Physicist (2012) by drdeca on Thursday May 30, 2019 @09:40AM (#20051000)
“Represents” is a tricky word.

Though, whether one can exchange a particular paper for a particular amount of gold is not a matter of pure imagination.

Re:Exponential Economist Meets Finite Physicist (2012) by sbov on Wednesday May 29, 2019 @10:37PM (#20047867)
Taxes.