ความคิดเห็นที่ 1 ไปหาวิทยานิพนธ์ที่ผ่านมามาอ่าน จะง่ายกว่าและจะจับหลักได้ว่าทำยังไงถึงจะเปลี่ยนความคิดมาโชว์ทางตัวหนังสือหรือสมการคณิตฯ จากคุณ : . - [ 24 ธ.ค. 50 20:52:13 A:24.98.135.127 X: TicketID:012743 ]

ความคิดเห็นที่ 2 I develop mathematical models in biomedical sciences. Although I have no experiences in economics, but, by principles, I believe it would be the same--- ideas into mathematical equations. For instance, I have two chemicals  A and B. These two chemicals compete each other for an enzyme C. Since A is quicker at this competition process, B cannot bind to B (compared to A). Well, I look into a textbook in enzymology for this phenomena and found out that there are certain ways to describe this competition process, mathematically as follows; Reduction Rate of B = Vmax * [B]/(Km*[1+[A]/Ki + [B] ] And the reduction of A could also be decribed using the similar equation form. So, I believe that your phenomena of interest should be described somewhere in econ. textbooks, so look them up krub. If there is none, that means you are dealing with a new phenomena with an unknown mathematical description... If this is the case, you have to go deeper into pure math journals/papers and you might have found a very new thing like applications of the Game Theory in economics. Good luck krub. แก้ไขเมื่อ 24 ธ.ค. 50 22:13:24 จากคุณ : amatuer translator - [ 24 ธ.ค. 50 22:11:14 ]

ความคิดเห็นที่ 3 ขอบขอบคุณทังความคิดเห็นที่1และที่2นะคะ โดยเฉพาะคุณ amatuer translator ค่ะ ติดตามเวบไกลบ้านมานานรู้สึกว่าคุณ amatuer translator เป็นคนมีน้ำใจมากๆค่ะ จากคุณ : Econprentis - [ วันคริสต์มาส 20:54:31 A:161.200.255.162 X: TicketID:022749 ]

ความคิดเห็นที่ 4 Well, thanks for your compliment krub. Hmmm, since I didn't have a strong background in mathematics when I started to work on mathematical modeling, it was pretty difficult. So when I saw your question, "how to change ideas to mathematical equations". I think that this is a really important question. Another side of the coin, even mathematicians can not easily come up with those equations because they don't know the nature of biological (or economics) phenomena. So, this is a basic question with a very difficult solution to come up with a person who can think in both directions (math and a specific discipline). As time passed, I realized that I am not the only person struggling with this difficult situation. From Klaibann, I notice that people who share this bitterness are primarily economists. :) Well, I learned that economists have tried to incorporate mathematical concepts/algorithm into their models as an attempt to describe or explain their problems. From time to time, I saw them using stochastic processes... Up to present, it still is not clear to me why they choose to use it. :) In biological sciences, we use stochasticity to describe carcinogenesis (a process of which causes cancer). Understandly, stochasticity is applied into this case because mutation rate of normal cells to cancer cells is really really low (less than 10exp(-10) per day. Anyway, I still believe that mathematics is a universal language krub.... Even I am really dumb at it, but if I would like to speak this gibberish langauge I must learn how to use it properly krub. Good luck krub... and, in your case, reading textbooks and papers may give you some initial clues to work on. จากคุณ : amatuer translator - [ วันคริสต์มาส 21:17:06 ]

ความคิดเห็นที่ 5 http://mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/item/default.asp?tid=10276&ttype=2 จากคุณ : โจ - [ 26 ธ.ค. 50 02:06:12 A:124.120.148.161 X: TicketID:161558 ]

ความคิดเห็นที่ 6 I am on holiday in Vienna now na krab. I am now using the hostel's internet so I cannot type longer than this. But my e-mail address is banchongsan@msn.com I may not be the best person to give you advise but I am willing to help. Contact me by e-mail na krab. I should be able to reply you from the next week. TO P' AT, I can use only 3 more minutes of internet. But briefly, the real world is stochastic, so any modelling work in economics must applied stochastic process. For example the movement of stock price is assumed to be stochastic. จากคุณ : Boong (B Oprysk) - [ 26 ธ.ค. 50 05:13:06 ]

ความคิดเห็นที่ 7 >> As time passed, I realized that I am not the only person struggling with this difficult situation. From Klaibann, I notice that people who share this bitterness are primarily economists. :) Totally agree krub P'AT :-) จากคุณ : Tony Almeida - [ 26 ธ.ค. 50 11:44:18 ]

ความคิดเห็นที่ 8 Thank you very much naka for all people in Klaibann.I have seen this web for such a long time.All people at here very kind and very warm ka. Special thanks for Khun.Boong (B Oprysk) and Khun. โจ naka including Khun.amatuer translator and others for the answer ka. เพิ่งหัดใช้ภาษาอังกฤษค่ะถ้าใช้ผิดยังไงขอโทษด้วยนะคะ จากคุณ : Econprentis - [ 26 ธ.ค. 50 20:45:15 A:161.200.255.162 X: TicketID:022749 ]

ความคิดเห็นที่ 9 one in a rare kratuu in Klaibann na niaaaa... Let me guess. . .  your problem is mainly about your understanding of mathematical methods used in economics and how those methods related to economic theory . . . and finally the economic theory itself that you don't clearly understand (and probably you understand but not be convinced, that's why you don't see the idea behind that.) Why I say method, instead of model? As you long you understand the meaning of expectation, weighted average, you understand quite 60% of macroeconomic papers, roughly speaking. I guess, what you don't understand is why this (random) variables must follow some specific stochastic process and that variable linked to other parts of the models / markets desribed in the model. Or why the authors use this 'method' and the meaning of that method and result, e.g. Lagrangian Multipliers in some policy functions / Euler equation. . . . Way out? Go read good mathematical economic books to understand the method, Simon and Blume is a cliche but useful on optimization, especially meaning of Lagrange multiplier. An old, but classic, book good for economists is Intrilligator on Mathematical Optimization and  Economic Theory To Bong, even the economic life is stochastic, we need not to model our 'model' (situation of interest) in stochastic process way. You have a good math background, but don't be fooled by methods. Many 'new' classic papers don't use 'stochastic process' to model and give insights, they rather use simple model that capture the important elements of situation / person and sound behavioral assumption to derive the insightful and astounding ideas. (I think you know people like Myerson, Tirole, Laffont, Maskin, have u seen them writting a stochastic process paper?) แก้ไขเมื่อ 27 ธ.ค. 50 10:31:16 จากคุณ : AmoreVincitOmnia - [ 27 ธ.ค. 50 10:28:49 ]

ความคิดเห็นที่ 10 To K. Econprentis: All of these guys are all qualified to be your graduate committee members (except me, a non-economist). Believe me, all of them are exceptional and eager to help you! Best regards, A.T. จากคุณ : amatuer translator - [ 27 ธ.ค. 50 10:44:13 ]

ความคิดเห็นที่ 11 To P' AVO, I guess I typed too fast in the previous post as I had only 3 minutes left for internet access. I intended to type 'many' not 'any'. I do agree that stochastic approach is not applied in many influential papers. I believe that any good model must be able to capture the underlying idea, which is constructed according to the underlying assumption. Whether stochastic approach should be applied depends on the assumption of the model. My example in the previous post should be clear. Stock price is assumed to be stochastic (and usually martingale)as it makes sense this way. It would make completely no sense to assume that stock price is non-stochastic. แก้ไขเมื่อ 29 ธ.ค. 50 19:52:19 จากคุณ : Boong (B Oprysk) - [ 29 ธ.ค. 50 05:28:29 ]