The Sultonov Regression Model (SRM) - claiming to be a mathematical model of the market. - page 30
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
Yusuf's innovation is that he abstracted from the a priori description of the model by plausible functions.
Have you seen conclusion 18?
There's an interesting twist there...
;)
And you seem to find it difficult to see relationships deeper than one level...
If you accept that the price depends on the 'desire to buy', then the 'desire' itself changes over time - that's understandable, I hope...
Let's put it this way:
Price as a function of desire C(G);
Desire as a function of time G(t);
Then C(G)=C(G(t));
This nesting can be continued by inventing anything else besides 'desire', but in the end the independent variable is time t.
In your delusional terminology, NOT desire as a function of time, but desire as a function of an event
But this won't help you, you'll say that the event as a function of time
that's more convenient for you.
Read again the two lines of my post above yours. If you don't understand what I've written after 10 times, go to one line of my post.
If time moves the price and the dependence of the current price is m times less on the kth previous price value than on the previous price value (or whatever regression) then one can only talk about the absence of dependence on time in the heat of the moment, or by professing Wiener processes...
By the way, in the random Brownian motion do you see any dependence? What does it all dance on?
:)
In your delusional terminology, it is NOT a desire as a function of time, but an event as a function of time
But it doesn't help you to say that the event is a function of time
that's more convenient for you.
Bears, it's simpler than that. There is no need to reason, the X-axis is time, the Y-axis is price, that's it. It would be more correct to say that the price does not depend on time, but on the Y-axis - time (there would be no conflict in mind). Dependence on time or not on time is a philosophical question.
Bears, it's simpler than that. No need to reason, on the X-axis - time, on the Y-axis - price, everything. It would be more correct to say that it is not the price that depends on time, but on the Y axis - time (there would be no conflict in the mind). Dependence on time or not on time, a philosophical question.
per se
But then there won't be a scandal ))
In your delusional terminology, it is NOT desire as a function of time, it is desire as a function of an event.
But that won't help you, because you'll say the event is a function of time
you're more comfortable that way.
Well... I'll rave in my own way... and you'll rave in your own way, you'll rave in your own way...
;)))))
Bears, everything is simpler here. There is no need to think, X-axis is time, Y-axis is price; that's all. It would be more correct to say that the price does not depend on time, and that on the Y axis - time (there would be no conflict in mind). Dependence on time or not on time, a philosophical question.
Quite right.
But I would sincerely urge you to go back to Yusuf's much vaunted, and therefore unread, article and follow the author's thinking.
I think he will enjoy explaining the controversial and complex twists and turns of conclusion 18.
Mashki seems to understand everything but calculate a weighted average and get confused.
;)
sure.
but then there won't be a scandal ))
Go back to the smoking room!
The Scandalous Animator
well... I'll rave in my own way... and you will rave in your own way - that is, you will rave in your own way...
;)))))
Yeah! In the bushes. And talk.
Go to the smoke room!
Get out!