Historical account of the notion of equilibrium

Reprendre la référence principale de Israel et ajouter peut-être d'autres personnes :

Early criticisms of the notion of equilibrium

\cite{Veblen2010} 1898 – I don't think he openly rejected the idea of equilibrium, bu as Blaug has said it in \cite{Blaug_2003} (p. 150) there was no use of Walras before the 1940s : "it [Walras's work] suffered a gradual demise after Walras's death in 1910 and by 1930 it is doubtful that there were more than a half-dozen economists in the world who had ever read Walras, much less understood him.". So maybe he did not know about this at all.
Poincaré and Walras's quote.
Speech by Leontieff that Jose sent.

New inputs in economics today

As Georgio Israel puts it in the late part of their reference work  \cite{Israel2015}, the study of equilibrium, while still used by central banks to this day for economic planning has lost momentum in the academic profession. After Arrow and Debreu showed in their 1954 paper : "Existence of an Equilibrium for a Competitive Economy" \cite{Arrow1954} that under very strong assumptions in a certain competitive economy their exists an equilibrium [CITE KIRMAN].

Conclusion

Acknowledgements

JP Bouchaud, A Breedt, JP Nadal, A  Kirman, F Brechenmacher

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Previous abstract : This aim of this article is to extend the work of Giorgio Israel who in his famous book The Invisible Hand. Economic Equilibrium in the History of Science, published in 1990 reviewed the history of the notion of equilibrium in economy. As he pointed out in the foreword of the 2015 edition, there had been some new discoveries in the field, especially with the upbringing of a new field of research : econophysics. With such of revival of links between physics and economics, this paper shall try to understand the early causes of the apparition of the notion of equilibrium in economics (be it physics or not).

Résumé des articles sur l'histoire de la notion of equilibrium

Israel 2015 (published in 1990) : The invisible Hand. Economic Equilibrium in the History of Science.

\cite{giorgio2015} : Livre dont le titre est : The Invisible Hand. Economic Equilibrium in the History of Science. Traite de l'histoire d'une théorie de l'équilibre. Presque exhaustif, le livre reconnait les propres limite du travail. Il remonte jusqu'à l'époque de Walras, et remonte avant lui. Analyse en partie basée sur l'adoration des scientifiques de l'époque (période des lumières) de la mécanique newtonienne.
--> je pense que c'est la référence la plus importante que l'on ait. Approche externe et interne, très intéressant.
Chapter II : The Origins, 1. An open problem
"No one studying the theory's origins in contemporary manuals can help seeing Walras as an isolated peak rising from a plain broken only by a few modest foothills" --> The problem of Walras' forerunners, who are they ? Réponse (José) : je dirais dans un premier temps Adam Smith, son concept de main invisible n'est rien d'autre que l'équilibre qui fait que, malgré les intérêts égoïste des individus, un marché arrive à s'organiser comme un équilibre de "forces", ensuite dans la mathématisation de ces concepts Cournot est une référence indispensable. Réponse (Quentin) : Certes mais je pense qu'il y a plus que ça. Il parle de la volonté d'une grande partie de la communauté scientifique de l'époque de mathématiser le social comme en mécanique et la thèse du livre est justement que c'est parce que l'on voulait tout mathématiser que l'on en est arrivé à tout traiter sous forme d'équilibre. La partie II du livre traite de ces questions d'Origins et trouve quelques réponses qui remontent à avant Walras.

Importance of Mark Blaug

Historian of economic thought, "specialist" of the notion of equilibrium, cited by Kirman multiple times. Published a lot in the 90s and 00s, but we can see only to references to this author in \cite{giorgio2015}'s work. This is where it becomes interesting regarding the fact that this major book is not up to date. --> We need to look this way.
He published an article titled : A Methodological Appraisal of Marxian Economics, North-Holland, 1982, on voit bien où il va et comme il a développé tout ça hyper tardivement on voit l'importance qu'il a.
\cite{Blaug_2001} --> Critical article of the lack of history of economics into most of the economic curriculums in top research universities. 
--------------------------------------------