Waves.
Light is a particle. And a wave.
Sound is waves.
People wave… um...
I meant there are waves in the ocean.
The markets. They have waves.
The economy goes through cycles that look a lot like waves.
What is it with these waves?
I used to be into enough pop physics to wax intellectualish about the latest theories, but I’ve left the Greene and such on the shelf for too long to fake that kind of funk today.
So I’ll wing it.
These various patterns — light, sound, valuing start-up companies, the economy — follow a similar pattern.
There is a direction of the underlying thing, visualized by an arrow:
And our approximation of the the thing, the wave element:
Now, according to 7th grade physics and common sense, there are differences between light and waves and economics, but this is the Internet, so let’s dispense with such details.
The point is: there is a direction things are heading in while at the same time there is the point where we measure things which fluctuates.
According to the wikipedia introduction to Quantum Mechanics:
Quantum mechanics ordains that the more closely one pins down one measurement (such as the position of a particle), the less precise another measurement pertaining to the same particle (such as its momentum) must become. This is called the uncertainty principle, also known as the Heisenberg principle after the person who first proposed it.
Now before you physics folks start getting huffy, the Internet also makes it clear that:
Some aspects of quantum mechanics can seem counter-intuitive or even paradoxical, because they describe behaviour quite different than that seen at larger length scales, where classical physics is an excellent approximation.
In other words, the Scientists want to make sure that we non-scientists don’t get all-extrapolatory-on-their-ass and start drawing analogies between things like the Uncertainty Principle and economics.
But that was before Medium.
The thing is, macro-things like housing prices, very much remind me of the quantum-mechanics we encounter on a micro level: there is some guess as to what one aspect of the thing is (location, true value) while there is another known aspect of the thing (momentum, price) that we influence by approximating the other thing.
However, when in the case of something like the value of a start-up, it operates at a totally different scale than that of an electron and by totally different functions: rather than one guy sitting in a lab with a complex machine, there is an entire group of people staring at the thing, talking about the thing, evaluating the thing, over an extended period of time.
Clearly, at the level of abstraction of the individual within a specific place and time, the analogy between electrons and stocks decomposes, if we extend the scope to create an analogical structure of the measure of housing prices or startups, the obvious similarity becomes glaringly obviouser.
Lets, define A as the set of things where measurement matters.
B as the shapes we use to describe things.
C to be the time it takes.
D to be the desire to explain it.
E to be the effort we put in.
F to be the grade we get for actually pulling it off.
So let’s try it more simply:
It is hard to measure things, whether in science, or investing, or art, or politics.
When we start measuring things, we influence the outcomes — whether through some physics or by herd behavior or by convincing others we are right.
But, importantly, there is an underlying reality we struggle to describe.
We try our best, we over-shoot, we under-shoot, we strive, we push.
We create seas of behavior, pushing prices up together, pulling sentiment down together, destroying empires, creating demi-gods.
We ride the arrows of these dreams and ideals towards some vision of an underlying reality that we can never quite grasp, but we grapple with it everyday because there is nothing more worthy of our lives.
We do our part. We work. We try.
But sometimes, we let go.
We can live beside the ocean.
Leave the fire behind.
Swim out past the breakers.
And listen to the waves.
