Skip to main content

Quantum Economics - David Orrell ****

David Orrell's earlier title Economyths is one of my favourite popular science books of all time. Or, perhaps, I should say popular non-science, as Orrell shows just how devastatingly traditional economics uses the tools of science without having a scientific basis. I was, therefore, really looking forward to reading Orrell's new book - until I saw the title. As anyone involved with physics can tell you, there's nothing more irritating than the business of sticking the word 'quantum' onto something to give a pseudo-scientific boost to waffle and woo. Was Orrell doing the same thing? Thankfully, his introduction put my fears aside.

Orrell, a mathematician with a physics background quickly makes it clear that the way he is using quantum theory is not just employing magic words, but involves making use of strong parallels between the nature of quantum objects and concepts like money (more on money in a moment). Yes, this is to some extent a metaphorical use of quantum theory - but this isn't something physicists should turn their nose up at, because physics uses analogy all the time. When James Clerk Maxwell came up with the equations of electromagnetism, he first used a mechanical model. This was later translated into a mathematical model - but a model in the scientific sense is just a quantitative analogy. When we describe light, for example, as particles or waves or disturbances in quantum field these are all models. Light is light. These are the models we can work with that work effectively - and this is the approach Orrell takes with quantum economics.

I mentioned money. Orrell makes it clear that conventional economics really doesn't deal properly with money - in fact it largely ignores it, other than as a measure. But as he shows, money is far more than they allow for, having a dual nature that Orrell uses to draw a parallel with entanglement in quantum physics. It might seem baffling that economists aren't worried about money, but apparently they see it only as a stand-in for barter: Orrell makes it clear how much more it is. The head-in-the-sand approach of the economics profession results in their pretty much ignoring the financial sector, a bizarre oversight that makes their total shock at the 2008 crash not at all surprising.

We also see how the models that economists use are based on a false picture of the economy based on the idea of stability where actions are taken by independent agents, always getting their decisions perfectly right. It's so far from real life, it's laughable. And, as Orrell shows, although over the last couple of decades there have been attempts to tweak conventional economics to incorporate some behavioural issues, it is still based on a false foundation that means it can never be truly effective, which combined with economists rarely revealing their vested interests means that any advice from economists should arguably be totally ignored.

Although Orrell doesn't claim to have all the answers, or the mechanisms to rework economic theory and practice, he shows how using parallels with quantum theory (sometimes verging on actual quantum behaviour) could be used to give economics a better chance of reflecting reality. Economists would still not be able to predict that a crash would happen at a certain date, but would be able to have better flags that suggested we were heading that way - and could provide better advice for decision makers. At the moment, though, the senior economists, like the high priests of old, have no intention of giving up their positions of power based on an outmoded way of thinking.

This book is remarkable, but has a couple of significant issues. The introductory section giving background on quantum theory is probably necessary, but I can imagine many who aren't scientists, or don't read popular science, not getting past it. And Orrell does regularly labour his points in a way that manages to be both too academic and too fuzzy for a title like this (there's quantum superposition for you). I lost count how many times the main points were made, and how often I felt I could not really see what argument Orrell was presenting. Quantum Economics doesn't have the scapel-like precision of Economyths.

However, this shouldn't get in the way of the fact that where with Economyths Orrell concentrated on showing what was wrong with contemporary economics, here he offers a radically different way to approach it. As with its predecessor, most economists won't get it - there's an element of turkeys voting for Christmas if they do - but for the rest of us, from the rare opportunity to get into the guts of economics (I hadn't even realised the importance of governments being in debt, or economists' strange aversion to thinking about money) to a remarkably fresh view for the future of economics if attention were given to it, this is a landmark book.

Paperback:  

Kindle:  
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you


Review by Brian Clegg

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Book of Minds - Philip Ball ****

It's fitting that this book on the nature of minds should be written by the most cerebral of the UK's professional science writers, Philip Ball. Like the uncertainty attached to the related concept of consciousness, exactly what a mind is , and what makes it a mind, is very difficult to pin down. Ball takes us effectively through some of the difficult definitions and unpacking involved to understand at least what researchers mean by 'mind', even if their work doesn't not necessarily enlighten us much. A lot of the book is taken up with animals and to what extent they can be said to have minds. Ball bases his picture of a mind on a phrase that is reminiscent of Nagel's famous paper on being a bat. According to Ball, an organism can be said to have a mind if there is something that is what it is like to be that organism. (You may need to read that a couple of times.) At one end of the spectrum - apes, cetaceans, dogs, for instance - it's hard to believe that t

Forget Me Not - Sophie Pavelle ***(*)

There was a lot to like in Sophie Pavelle's debut popular science title. In it, she visits ten locations in the UK (against the backdrop of the Covid lockdowns) where species that are in some way threatened by humans and/or climate change are found. The writing style is extremely light and personal, while the content on the different species was both interesting and informative. I particularly enjoyed chapters on sea grass and dung beetles, which are accompanied by coverage of a species each of butterfly, porpoise, bat, guillemot, salmon, hare, bird of prey and bumblebee. There's a nice mix of three threads - writing about the species itself, about the visit to the location (so something close to travel writing, as Pavelle attempts to avoid driving and flying as much as possible) and about the environmental side. I'm not sure the writing style is for everyone - I found it verged on arch at times, didn't endear me with several enthusiastic references to Love Island and

The Midwich Cuckoos (SF) - John Wyndham *****

The recent TV adaptation of John Wyndham's classic science fiction novel inspired me to dig out my copy (which has a much better cover than the current Penguin version) to read it again for the first time in decades - and it was a treat. Published in 1957, the book takes a cosy world that feels more typical of a 1930s novel - think, for example, of a village in Margery Allingham's or Agatha Christie's books - and applies to it a wonderfully innovative SF concept. Rather than give us the classic H. G. Wells alien invasion, which, as a character points out, is really just conventional warfare with a twist, Wyndham envisaged a far more insidious invasion where the aliens are implanted in every woman of childbearing age in the village (in a period of time known as the Dayout, when everyone is rendered unconscious).  Apparently like humans but for their bright golden eyes, a joined consciousness and the ability to influence human minds, the Children effectively take over the vil