David Orrell

David Orrell Economyths David Orrell Quantum Economics  David Orrell Paul Wilmott Money Formula

“Must be good as I’ve had hate mails from economists for writing a positive review of it”   Brian Clegg


more reviews

David Orrell
This Quantum Economics and Finance introduction on youtube

David Orrell 

new book 2/2022

iconbooks.com  2/2022  MONEY, MAGIC, AND HOW TO DISMANTLE A FINANCIAL BOMB – Quantum Economics for the Real World  by DAVID ORRELL

Money has many apparently magical properties. It can be created out of the void – and vanish without so much as a puff of smoke. It can flash through space. It can grow without limit. And it can blow up without warning. David Orrell argues that the emerging discipline of quantum economics, of which he is at the forefront, is the key to shattering the illusions that prevent us from understanding money’s true nature. In this colourful tour of the history, philosophy and mathematics of money, Orrell demonstrates how everything makes much more sense when we replace our classical economic models with ones based on quantum probability – and reveals the explosive reality of what is left once the illusions are stripped away.

Money, Magic, and How to Dismantle a Financial Bomb


economist.com 11/2021 David Orrell shows up in The Economist

gmcaw: The Economist’s Buttonwood mentions David Orrell! Mind you it’s in the same disembedded manner in which heteros are occasionally allowed to represent “latest research”!;-D.  Not a whisper about Orrell being DSGE-hate-mail attracting author of Economyths. To be fair, Buttonwood has a history of referencing heteros and heretics – up to a point.  Use The Economist search button for Steve Keen and you discover entries up to 2013, ie just before Krugman had to put the phone down on their savings&loans exchange. Was Buttonwood a confused Krugman fan ? Try David Orrell in the search and you get zero. Apparently The Economist didn’t even review Economyths? Death threats perhaps? 

…”Such similarities (between finance and physics) have spawned a niche area of research known as quantum finance. In a forthcoming book, “Money, Magic, and How to Dismantle a Financial Bomb”, David Orrell, one of its leading proponents, surveys the landscape. Mr Orrell argues that modelling markets with the mathematical toolbox of quantum mechanics could lead to a better understanding of them.

Classical financial models are rooted in the mathematical idea of the random walk. They start by dividing time into a series of steps, then imagine that at each step the value of a risky asset like a stock can go up or down by a small amount. Each jump is assigned a probability. After many steps, the probability distribution for the asset’s price looks like a bell curve centred on a point determined by the cumulative relative probabilities of the moves up and the moves down.

A quantum walk works differently. Rather than going up or down at each step, the asset’s price evolves as a “superposition” of the two possibilities, never nailed down unless measured in a transaction. At each step, the various possible paths interfere like waves, sometimes amplifying each other and sometimes cancelling out. This interference creates a very different probability distribution for the asset’s final price to that generated by the classical model. The bell curve is replaced by a series of peaks and troughs….”…

David Orrell quantum finance


amazon  2020 Quantum Economics and Finance


“Written in clear and accessible language, this book covers the essential mathematics behind economic and finance topics such as quantum cognition, option pricing, and quantum game theory, and delves into the nuts and bolts of quantum mechanics, the principles of quantum economic modelling, and the basics of quantum computer logic. 

The word “quantum” is from the Latin for “how much” and in this book mathematician David Orrell shows how it applies to the world of economic transactions. On the way the reader will learn how quantum interference can be used to model cognitive dissonance, how a quantum walk goes further than a random walk, and how financial entanglement explains the rate of mortgage default. 

The book is aimed at anyone who wants to understand the quantum ideas working their way into economics and finance, without getting drowned in wave equations. As interest in quantum computing grows, many companies from established banks to startups are looking at ways to perform financial simulations using quantum algorithms. But what if we should be using quantum models anyway – because the monetary system has quantum properties of its own, and because they work?”



regular articles on worldfinance.com

managementtoday.co.uk  2019 Does economics need a quantum revolution? DEFEND YOUR WORK: David Orrell, author of Quantum Economics, explains why our understanding of money is all wrong.

worldfinance.com 2015  Economics’ big bipolar problem – Warring economists are stuffing up the discipline’s scientific credibility  

Readers of this column, no doubt concerned for my wellbeing, have occasionally asked how my book Economyths – a critique of mainstream economics from the point of view of an applied mathematician – was received by economists.  The book, which also served as the basis for many Econoclast articles, did muster a number of positive reviews, from publications ranging from Bloomberg to Handelsblatt. The science writer Brian Clegg called it “probably one of the most important books I’ve ever read” (he’s not an economist, I just wanted to mention it, before we go on). Perhaps the strongest endorsement was from Czech economist Tomas Sedlacek, who co-wrote a subsequent book with me.

Not everyone was so complimentary. In an online discussion at the leading Canadian economics blog Worthwhile Canadian Initiative, a group of university economists, wrote off my book based on what they could find on Google, describing it variously as juvenile, idiotic, intellectually lazy, semi-articulated, ignorant, and “sort of like Malcolm Gladwell without the insight” (ouch). One poster even compared me to a climate change denier. They could have thrown a copy on a fire, if they’d bought one. …”…