Dedicated to co-founders and beginners - page 4
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
Can you be more specific. Whose property is volatility according to you?
The point is to clarify the concept of "property". Below is a piece of the definition on Wikipedia.
A property (in philosophy, mathematics and logic) is an attribute of an object. For example, a red object is said to have the property of redness.
Therefore, by analogy, an apple may be reddish burgundy or other red shades, but the property of colour remains. Even if we imagine that the colour could change, the colour property would still be the basic colour property, and changing it would already be a property of the colour, but not of the apple.
The analogy with a harmonic (or other form) signal seems to me more suitable. Here it is the FORM of the signal that will have the basic property, while the amplitude will have no effect on the basic properties, although the amplitude will be a property in relation to the form of the signal.
If we come to the first part of the game description, we can imagine that if we increase the number of participants and give them more freedom of action (enter and exit the game at any time, bet different values, etc.), in some parts of time the amplitude of dynamic equilibrium (volatility) may change greatly, but the DR property itself remains the same regardless of the number of participants and their actions freedom. This is what I meant by the property of ER.
To answer the question, volatility is a property of dynamical equilibrium (analogy of amplitude to waveform), but I find it much more difficult (almost impossible) to use for the reasons listed above: no input data about the number of participants, size and direction of bets, entry and exit times of each (five independent pre variables).
♪ Zeitgeist - rebuttal http://game-torrent.info/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6845&view=newest♪
Come on, the truth is in the middle, as they say.
>> of course they overdid it in the first part of the movie... just to say that religion's always been used for political purposes.
//
However, the profitability of monotheism and the new religion was timely considered for the state and the church! The rulers realised that with a united and strong religion it was easier to rule the people and wage predatory wars. For 2000 years the struggle for power and profit was the only application for religion! The endless religious wars in which the church was and is still involved have resulted in the deaths of millions of people!
The very attitude of the church towards the Spiritual World is also interesting. From the Doctrine itself, in 325, at the Council of Nicaea, its important part - about the reincarnation of the Soul - was withdrawn. That is why the "western religions" are so different from the "eastern religions" - Buddhism, Hinduism, etc. - in which this idea is retained. Christ Himself was chosen to be considered God, even though the old Christian sources said that He was an incarnated Spirit. The first thing the church did when it came to power was to destroy everything that had to do with human contact with the spiritual world. Pagan places of worship were burned and destroyed. The spirits themselves the church propaganda declared "devils, satans, devils" etc. The Church accused all undesirables of communion with devils. Across Europe, the Inquisition was rampant. Thousands of people were burned, hanged, executed, and suspected of having anything to do with the Spiritual World, as well as all others who were undesirable to the church and state. The rampant "Church Satanism" in Europe lasted several hundred years - you know it from the history books!
Come on, the truth is in the middle, as they say.
of course they went too far in the first part of the movie... they just wanted to say that religion has always been used for political purposes
//
However, the profitability of monotheism and the new religion was considered in time for the state and the church! The rulers realized that with a united and strong religion it is easier to rule the people and conduct predatory wars. For 2000 years the struggle for power and profit was the only application for religion! The endless religious wars in which the church was and is still involved have resulted in the deaths of millions of people!
The very attitude of the church towards the Spiritual World is also interesting. From the Doctrine itself, in 325, at the Council of Nicaea, its important part - about the reincarnation of the Soul - was withdrawn. That is why the "western religions" are so different from the "eastern religions" - Buddhism, Hinduism, etc. - in which this idea is retained. Christ Himself was chosen to be considered God, even though the old Christian sources said that He was an incarnated Spirit. The first thing the church did when it came to power was to destroy everything that had to do with human contact with the spiritual world. Pagan places of worship were burned and destroyed. The spirits themselves the church propaganda declared "devils, satans, devils" etc. The Church accused all undesirables of communion with devils. Across Europe, the Inquisition was rampant. Thousands of people were burned, hanged, executed, and suspected of having anything to do with the Spiritual World, as well as all others who were undesirable to the church and state. The rampant "church Satanism" in Europe lasted several hundreds of years - you know it from the history books!
there's a lot mixed up in both this and this film..... especially this scrolling is suspicious...
all this needs to be sorted out by professional historians.
I want to emphasize at once that all of the following is purely my personal opinion, which may be wrong in whole or in part. I have no need to prove or convince anyone of anything. If you will find useful - use, otherwise everyone has own way.
The whole text is nonsense. A typical "cargo cult" - ignorance of the factual material is compensated by a rich fantasy.
Zeitgeist - rebuttal http://game-torrent.info/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6845&view=newest
I suggest we leave religion alone. I agree with sabluk, the truth is somewhere in the middle, or to be more precise, it is within us. As far as we are ready for it, we will get closer to it. And in the rebuttal an attempt has been made to point out some inaccuracies or inconsistencies in "reality" by shifting the essence into a discussion of details, but that is not the point.
The basic idea which has sounded in both films - is existence of various ways of manipulation of people consciousness and their actions in consequence. It does not matter what they are manipulated by: religion, disinformation, television, or money. Of all the ways, money has been the most pervasive, invisible (i.e., self-evident) and large-scale means of fooling people. From the moment money became a TOWARDSHIP, its role as a universal and honest (equivalent) means of exchange disappeared, it became a tool (lever) which could be easily manipulated by the masses. And the masses have become DEEPLY dependent on money. And any dependence that does not imply abandonment (willingly or unwillingly) is Slavery.
The whole text is nonsense. A typical "cargo cult" - ignorance of factual material is compensated by rich fantasy.
I would be happy to read your correct version, i.e. the factual material.
I would be happy to read your correct version, i.e. the factual material.
Should I read the Financial Markets course here? I have expressed my assessment of the proposed work. "If you find it useful - use it, otherwise everyone has his own way." I.e. if there is interest in the factual material, then there is enough literature.
Should I read the Financial Markets course here? I have expressed my assessment of the proposed work. "If you find it useful, use it, otherwise everyone has their own way." i.e. if there is interest in the factual material, then there is enough literature.
Can we get links to factual material on "Financial Markets"?