Comments on: Hedge funds discovered not to be an “asset class” after all http://allaboutalpha.com/blog/2008/10/23/hedge-funds-discovered-not-to-be-an-asset-class-after-all/ A finance blog about hedge funds, portable alpha and alternative investing. Mon, 13 Feb 2012 11:26:54 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc hourly 1 By: Alpha Male http://allaboutalpha.com/blog/2008/10/23/hedge-funds-discovered-not-to-be-an-asset-class-after-all/comment-page-1/#comment-139903 Alpha Male Fri, 24 Oct 2008 23:18:49 +0000 http://allaboutalpha.com/blog/?p=3577#comment-139903 Thanks, Laurel, for the update on Pluto's status. We've learned something new about space today. Hopefully, you will now refer to the Kuiper Belt as the "hedge funds of the solar system". ;) Thanks, Laurel, for the update on Pluto’s status. We’ve learned something new about space today.
Hopefully, you will now refer to the Kuiper Belt as the “hedge funds of the solar system”. ;)

]]> By: Reza Mahmud http://allaboutalpha.com/blog/2008/10/23/hedge-funds-discovered-not-to-be-an-asset-class-after-all/comment-page-1/#comment-139895 Reza Mahmud Fri, 24 Oct 2008 22:03:16 +0000 http://allaboutalpha.com/blog/?p=3577#comment-139895 Thanks for highlighting Dorsey's criteria of an asset class. I've been intrigued about this debate for quite a while. This powerpoint has a useful summary of the criteria that Greer, Kritzman and Sweden use to identify asset classes: http://www.cqa.org/uploads/papers/203644393646f2f901d6d9f.ppt Thanks for highlighting Dorsey’s criteria of an asset class. I’ve been intrigued about this debate for quite a while.

This powerpoint has a useful summary of the criteria that Greer, Kritzman and Sweden use to identify asset classes:
http://www.cqa.org/uploads/papers/203644393646f2f901d6d9f.ppt

]]> By: Laurel Kornfeld http://allaboutalpha.com/blog/2008/10/23/hedge-funds-discovered-not-to-be-an-asset-class-after-all/comment-page-1/#comment-139789 Laurel Kornfeld Fri, 24 Oct 2008 04:57:46 +0000 http://allaboutalpha.com/blog/?p=3577#comment-139789 You are incorrect in saying that Pluto was never a planet. The question of Pluto's planet status is still very much in dispute and is largely a matter of interpretation. The vote to demote Pluto was done in a highly controversial manner by only four percent of the International Astronomical Union, most of whom were not planetary scientists. It was immediately rejected by an equal number of professional astronomers led by one of the top Pluto experts in the world, Dr. Alan Stern, Principal Investigator of NASA's New Horizons mission to Pluto. The new IAU planet definition makes no sense in that it states dwarf planets are not planets at all and defines objects solely by where they are rather than by what they are. Using the IAU definition, Earth would not be a planet if placed in Pluto's orbit. Also, many planetary scientists do not belong to the IAU, which is dominated by astronomers who study phenomena other than planets. Many planetary scientists believe that the definition of planet should be kept broad to encompass any non-self-luminous spheroidal object orbiting a star. The key is that planets are in a state known as hydrostatic equilbrium, which means they have enough self-gravity to pull themselves into a round shape. When this happens, the objects experience differentiation into core, mantle and crust similar to Earth and the other bigger planets and also have the geological and meteorological processes that the bigger planets have, which inert, shapeless asteroids don't. Pluto, being in hydrostatic equilibrium, is fundamentally different than the great majority of objects in the Kuiper Belt, with a few exceptions of other round objects currently designated as "dwarf planets," specifically, Haumea, Makemake, Eris, and Ceres, which is in the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter. This issue could be easily resolved through an amendment that incorporates dwarf planets as a subclass of planets. I don't know anything about hedge funds, but I do know that the Pluto debate is far from over. You can find the petition of astronomers who rejected the IAU decision at http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/planetprotest/ and the proceedings of the Great Planet Debate, a conference held this summer to address this issue, at http://gpd.jhuapl.edu/ You are incorrect in saying that Pluto was never a planet. The question of Pluto’s planet status is still very much in dispute and is largely a matter of interpretation. The vote to demote Pluto was done in a highly controversial manner by only four percent of the International Astronomical Union, most of whom were not planetary scientists. It was immediately rejected by an equal number of professional astronomers led by one of the top Pluto experts in the world, Dr. Alan Stern, Principal Investigator of NASA’s New Horizons mission to Pluto. The new IAU planet definition makes no sense in that it states dwarf planets are not planets at all and defines objects solely by where they are rather than by what they are. Using the IAU definition, Earth would not be a planet if placed in Pluto’s orbit. Also, many planetary scientists do not belong to the IAU, which is dominated by astronomers who study phenomena other than planets. Many planetary scientists believe that the definition of planet should be kept broad to encompass any non-self-luminous spheroidal object orbiting a star. The key is that planets are in a state known as hydrostatic equilbrium, which means they have enough self-gravity to pull themselves into a round shape. When this happens, the objects experience differentiation into core, mantle and crust similar to Earth and the other bigger planets and also have the geological and meteorological processes that the bigger planets have, which inert, shapeless asteroids don’t. Pluto, being in hydrostatic equilibrium, is fundamentally different than the great majority of objects in the Kuiper Belt, with a few exceptions of other round objects currently designated as “dwarf planets,” specifically, Haumea, Makemake, Eris, and Ceres, which is in the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter. This issue could be easily resolved through an amendment that incorporates dwarf planets as a subclass of planets.

I don’t know anything about hedge funds, but I do know that the Pluto debate is far from over. You can find the petition of astronomers who rejected the IAU decision at http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/planetprotest/ and the proceedings of the Great Planet Debate, a conference held this summer to address this issue, at http://gpd.jhuapl.edu/

]]>