This preview shows pages 1–21. Sign up to view the full content.
This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.
View Full DocumentThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.
View Full DocumentThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.
View Full DocumentThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.
View Full DocumentThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.
View Full DocumentThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.
View Full DocumentThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.
View Full DocumentThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.
View Full DocumentThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.
View Full DocumentThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.
View Full Document
Unformatted text preview: Discrete vs. Continuous (taxicab geometry) • There is a strong tradition within academia (and science in particular) to assume that most of the time, it is OK to use a continuous model of a system, even if the system at issue is inherently discrete. The typical “justiFcation” is that “in the limit, discrete becomes continuous . . .” • What follows here is sort of a joke, but contains ideas worth thinking about . . . • Let’s consider “distance”  but in a special case. The “geometry” here is often called “taxicab geometry,” using “taxicab distance.” • Consider “distance” in a city, where we must follow streets. We want to go from A to B: A B 1 1 • The sides of the square are length 1, and we can either go this way: A B 1 1 • Or this way: A B 1 1 • But either way, the “taxicab distance” from A to B is 2: A B 1 1 • Now suppose there is “redevelopment,” and the city block is subdivided: A B 1/2 1/2 1/2 1/2 A B 1/2 1/2 1/2 1/2 • We can go from A to B in various ways: • We can go from A to B in various ways: A B 1/2 1/2 1/2 1/2 • We can go from A to B in various ways: A B 1/2 1/2 1/2 1/2 • We can go from A to B in various ways: A B 1/2 1/2 1/2 1/2 • We can go from A to B in various ways: A B 1/2 1/2 1/2 1/2 • We can go from A to B in various ways: A B 1/2 1/2 1/2 1/2 • We can go from A to B in various ways: A B 1/2 1/2 1/2 1/2 • But the “taxicab distance” from A to B is still exactly 2: A B 1/2 1/2 1/2 1/2 • Suppose we “subdivide” more: A B 1/4 1/4 1/4 1/4 1/4 1/4 1/4 1/4 • Again, there are various ways we can go from A to B: A B 1/4 1/4 1/4 1/4 1/4 1/4 1/4 1/4 • Again, there are various ways we can go from A to B: A B 1/4 1/4 1/4 1/4 1/4 1/4 1/4 1/4 • Again, there are various ways we can go from A to B: A B 1/4 1/4 1/4 1/4 1/4 1/4 1/4 1/4 •...
View
Full
Document
This note was uploaded on 01/02/2012 for the course FINANCE 347 taught by Professor Bayou during the Fall '11 term at NYU.
 Fall '11
 Bayou
 Finance

Click to edit the document details