Chapter 27 return home

return home The conversation in the kitchen was always endless, and Holland's and Arthur's conversation went on hour after hour.By the end of the day, their discussion had jumped from chess to economics, from economics to checkers, to intrinsic models, genetic algorithms, and back to chess.Arthur felt he was finally beginning to understand what learning and adaptation were all about.When the two of them were bleary-eyed, they began to discuss in detail a way that might solve the problem of rational expectations in economics: why not use a Holland-German classifier system to simulate a group of economic agents, so that they behave like real economic agents What about learning from experience, thereby replacing the assumption that economic agents are perfectly rational?

Really, why not?Before falling asleep, Holland wrote a note reminding himself to find Samuel's computer checkers player transparencies that happened to be in his place.Arthur was already fascinated by the concept of this learning game software.He had never heard of such a thing before.Perhaps, Holland thought, he should give an impromptu speech to delegates on the subject tomorrow. This speech caused a strong response, especially when Holland pointed out to the audience that Samuel's computer checkers software is still in the leading position in its kind of software after three decades.However, Holland's statement from this perspective caused a strong response at the meeting not at all because such impromptu exchanges were unusual at the time.Delegates found it difficult to pinpoint exactly when the mood at the economics conference began to shift.It was only around the third day, when everyone cleared up the original barriers of academic terminology and cleared up mutual confusion, the meeting began to become lively.

"I found it very exciting," Stewart Kaufman said.After talking with Arthur for two weeks, he found that he lacked economic knowledge. “It’s funny how when you’re exposed to all the new things like finger painting, it’s kind of like being in kindergarten, or like a puppy, running around, sniffing around, and there’s this wonderful thing about discovering new things. It feels like the whole world is a wonderland to explore, and everything is new. For some reason, that’s how this meeting made me feel: always curious to know what other people think, their What are the standards, what are the issues in this new field. It's really very much to my liking. But I think that's also the style of a lot of people who come to this meeting, we've had long conversations with each other, each other Listen to each other."

It is not without irony that physicists were initially skeptical of the abstraction of mathematics, but this time it is mathematics that provides a common language. "In retrospect, I think Ken Arrow made the right decision," Eugenia Singer said.She was initially disappointed that Arrow did not include sociologists and psychologists in the conference. "Arrow brought together the best and most technically trained economists, and a sense of trust was built. The physicists at the meeting were amazed by their technical backgrounds. These economists were familiar with many technical Concepts, and even some physical models are very familiar, so we can use a common vocabulary to discuss issues with physicists and establish a language that can communicate with each other. However, if many sociologists without technical backgrounds are invited to come Going to a conference, I'm not sure if I can cross the language gulf."

After most of the formal presentations were over, participants broke into informal discussion groups to discuss specific issues.One of the most popular issues is chaos theory, and discussions of chaos often revolve around David Ruller in small conference rooms."We all know about chaos theory, we've all read about it," Holland said. "Some economists have done a lot of research in this area. But I remember when we saw some of the models that physicists had made about it." , are very excited.” Meanwhile, Anderson and Arthur participate in a balcony discussion about economic "types" such as technology lock-in or regional economic disparities.Arthur said: "I was too tired to talk and listen to discussions endlessly. I could only use this seminar discussion to test Phil Anderson's various mathematical skills."

But Arthur actually found himself on the same page as Anderson, as well as other physicists.“I like their emphasis on computer experiments,” he says. In the 1960s and 1970s, computer models were already in disrepute among economists.Because many early computer models were cobbled together from programmer-prone policy recommendations, the result of course was to make the computer generate recommendations in favor of that policy. "So when I saw computers being properly applied in physics, I was fascinated. I felt that the openness in the field of physics called out to me. It was an intellectual openness, a willingness to look at new concepts squarely, and no longer A dogmatic and rigid attitude about what to accept."

Meanwhile, Arthur was relieved that the rate of increasing returns had an impact on the meeting.In addition to his remarks on this, other economists are independently working on the issue.For example, one day attendees listened to a lecture by Emeritus Professor Hollis Chenery over the phone.Chenery was unable to attend the meeting due to serious illness.His presentation was about types of development and why countries, especially third world countries, differ in how they develop.In his speech he mentioned the rate of increasing returns."So, as soon as he hung up, Arrow jumped up, ran to the blackboard and said, 'Hollis Chenery mentioned increasing returns, now let me elaborate on that,'" Arthur said. So he spontaneously gave an hour-and-a-half lecture on the history of the idea of ​​increasing returns, linking it to the theory of trade, and without taking any notes. I never doubted Arrow has such a wealth of knowledge on increasing returns."

Just a few days later, Jose Scheinkman, who had done groundbreaking research on the application of the theory of increasing returns to international trade, and Michele Podling of the University of California, Los Angeles Michele Boldrin stayed up until three in the morning to come up with a theory of increasing returns economic development. Arthur said the discussion will inevitably involve whether the stock market will enter a cycle of increasing returns, as investors see other investors jumping in, so stocks keep bullish.Or conversely, is there a negative feedback effect?For example, when stockholders see that other investors have withdrawn, there will be a crash."I don't know why the stock market happened to be overheating at the time, so there was a lot of discussion about whether the theory was feasible, whether this would actually happen in reality, whether it would happen soon," Arthur said.

The consensus was: "This might happen." David Paines thought a crash was so likely that he called his broker and asked to sell some of his stock.His agent persuaded him to dismiss the idea.Sure enough, one month later, on October 19, 1987, the stock plunged 508 points in one day. Arthur said: "This has led to a popular saying that people think that the Santa Fe meeting predicted the stock market crash a month ago. We didn't actually predict it. But the stock market crash, of course. It’s because of this positive feedback mechanism that we’ve been talking about for a long time.”

And so the ten-day marathon seminar continued, with only a Saturday afternoon break.All were exhausted, exhausted, and delightfully exhausted.Arthur said: "At the end of the ten days, I felt that I was on a scientific plane. I couldn't believe that anyone was willing to listen to my point of view." But there are indeed many who are willing to listen.Arthur had to forego the last day of the conference because he had promised to give a speech in San Francisco on Friday, September 18 (Reed, who was unable to travel from New York to attend the conference, sent a congratulatory videotape) .But when Arthur returned on Monday afternoon, as soon as he stepped through the Abbey door, Paines greeted him with a smile.

"Did the meeting go well on the last day?" Arthur asked. "Oh, we're all very satisfied," replied Paines.Eugenia Singer was particularly enthusiastic and was preparing to report to Reed the gains of the meeting.He went on to say that as soon as the meeting was over, the institute held a scientific committee meeting, and the first motion of the meeting was that they wanted to invite Arthur to the scientific committee. Arthur was taken aback.The scientific committee is the sacred place within the institute, holding the real power of decision-making. "Of course I accepted the invitation," he said. "There's another consideration, and we're very reluctant to lose this opportunity," Paines said. "Everyone was very excited about the meeting, so we wanted to take the opportunity to expand it into a full-fledged research project. We've been While discussing this, I wonder if you and Holland will be able to come here next academic year and start this research project and make it work." Arthur understood in an instant that the scientific committee wanted to invite him and Holland to lead the study.He stammered back: He did have an annual leave to take, and in fact the research was very interesting to him.Of course, he is very happy to be able to host this research. He said: "I'm flattered. I do feel humbled. Leading a study like this has made me ask myself to this day: Who am I? I mean, there's Phil Anderson here, there's Ken A Nah, and then there's me. And they're asking me, what do you think about this, what do you think about that. So my reaction is, are they asking someone else? In my past academic career Nothing like this has ever happened before.” "You know, it's entirely possible for a scientist to feel that he's got some special skills and isn't accepted by the people in his circle. John Holland has been in that situation for decades. I certainly felt the same way. Until I Stepping into the Santa Fe Institute, these brilliant minds, these people I've only read about before, gave me the impression, 'How did it take you so long to get here?'" During the ten-day meeting, Arthur talked and listened endlessly.His mind was so full of thoughts that it hurt.He was exhausted and needed three weeks of sleep to recover, but he felt like he was in heaven. "From now on, I don't worry about what other economists think. The people who can share my research with me are concentrated in Santa Fe. Santa Fe is my home."