In a 1972 paper by Robert Merton, the following equation is derived:
$$\sigma(\mu;A,B,C,D)=\sqrt{\frac{A \mu^2-2B\mu+C}{D}}$$
This is known as the Markowitz frontier in finance. When this is plotted, the convention is to measure $\mu$ along the y-axis and $\sigma$ along the x-axis. Regardless of which variable is assigned to which axis, the result is a parabola (or maybe a hyperbola?)-looking thing.
In his paper Merton calls it a parabola. However, I recently saw an online lecture given at Yale university wherein Robert Shiller calls it a hyperbola.
Both Merton and Shiller are Nobel laureates. Which one is correct?
EDIT: Ah! To be fair to Merton, in his paper he doesn't call the above equation a parabola. He does, however, call the square of the above equation a parabola (pp. 1854). Does the above equation become a parabola if you square it?
Assuming that $B^2 < AC$ and $AD>0$ such that the expression under the square root sign is always positive, this produces (one branch of) a hyperbola.
To see it's not a parabola, simply note that for large $\mu$ the graph asymptotically approaches $\sigma=\left|\mu-\frac BA\right|\sqrt{A/D}$, which is not how a parabola behaves.
On the other hand, it's clearly a second-degree curve (square both sides to get a quadratic equation in $\sigma$ and $\mu$), and the only conic section that has asymptotes is a hyperbola.
The expression under the square root sign (and thus $\sigma^2$ as a function of $\mu$) does indeed produce a parabola.