Doug seems to be laying low on this one, but I think I will follow up with a few more remarks, especially as I have had some sleep and am in a better mood today. I am not, however, going to get into a general discussion of math in econ other than to say that you really cannot seriously do econ today without math. This does not mean that all math is good in econ. I support the protests by the post-autistic group in France against the uses of math to justify the establishment that are indeed endemic in much of economics today.
The paper uses a mathematical technique ("flare attractors") that has not been used in economics before. I suspect that it may have other uses than the one I put it to, which has been received well by Otto Rossler, the discoverer of flare attractors. I have already described how one can use it to describe in a clear way certain kinds of financial market dynamics. I also note that the paper is under revision and that the revised version (not up on my website yet) shows indeed that this technique generates levels of kurtosis (fat tails, or extreme events) that correspond very closely to those found in actual data on financial markets.
Although the paper is being presented at the Atlanta Fed, it is actually being presented to the Society for Nonlinear Dynamics and Econometrics, which is meeting there because the organizer, Jerry Dwyer, works in the Research Dept. there.
Finally, just for Doug, I would note that if one wishes to establish that a particular pattern of market behavior does not correspond to "reasonable market valuation," then one must resort to a mathematical model. One can say "I know it is, look at it," but this will not convince someone who does not agree with you. More is needed, much more, and it will inevitably involve a theoretical math model which will then be combined with econometric torturing of the data series in question, probably some pretty nasty econometric torturing at that.
Finally, the reason that I made my ironic remark was precisely that Doug is such an admirer of raw data in numerical form. If he said that none of it mattered, that what matters is the essence of exploitative relations, or something along these lines, or the nature of economic institutions to be understood purely verbally, then I would have more understanding of, appreciation for, and sympathy with his professed general hostility to the use of math in general in economics. Even if one does not like mathematical economics theory, if one wants to seriously make statements about those numerical tables, one will need to resort at least to econometrics.
As to whether I have done anything socially worthwhile using econometrics? Well, my coauthored papers on income inequality and the underground economy in transition economies (see website for several of those) directly attack Washington Consensus policies by the IMF et al. We, the authors of those papers, are even beginning to attract' some attention from those in policy circles to our arguments that social safety nets should be maintained in transition economies. Enough for now. Have a nice rest of the weekend everybody. Barkley Rosser rosserjb at jmu.edu http://cob.jmu.edu/rosserjb