Intuition testing - page 11
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
I agree with Svinozavr. :) We have made a good noise, and further the readers of a branch will make the decision proceeding from the arguments described above. Thanks to all, I propose to move on this note, the discussion in the mode FAQ on the software. :)
From now on,
I think you, Ilya, as an honest man, will have to write a new program (that will train your intuition to signal clearly and not vice versa).
Note: I'm just trying to provoke you :o)
I agree with Svinozavr. :) We have made a lot of noise normally, and then the readers of the thread will make a decision based on the arguments described above. Thanks to all, I propose to move on this note, the discussion in the mode FAQ on the software. :)
))) Come on - I didn't mean anything by it. Just... just remembering.
By the way, it just occurred to me, this thread has developed a random number generator with a normal distribution. So, if anyone needs it, use it. As an option, you can model its first differences closer to a normal distribution, scale it up and done.
ZS. I wonder if this idea has already been described on the forum? :)
ZS. I wonder if this idea has already been described on the forum? :)
I don't know, I'm just making up my own mind.
He'll do it. >> trust me. The point is that as long as the future is not predetermined there is an infinite number of possible alternative states (Schrodinger's cat). Only the observer determines (fixes) this or that scenario. The power of intuition allows a volitional impulse to change the universe on a local scale :). Often people simply do not remember the voice of intuition. It is present in them, but they do not hear it for some reason. There were experiments in which people :) rejected by force of will a uranium random number generator. But those were pros, of course. I can put up documentary evidence.Here's a question for you.
Suppose I hastily write down a sequence of numbers on a piece of paper, and one of these pros is asked to repeat the sequence, and what will he do?
A piece of paper is much more primitive than a Uranium HENERator.
By the way, it just occurred to me, this thread has developed a random number generator with a normal distribution. So, if anyone needs it, use it. Alternatively, you could model the first differences closer to a normal distribution, scale it up and you're done.
ZS. I wonder if this idea has already been described on the forum? :)
Who told you that it is normal? It's not normal!
>> who told you it was OK? It's not OK!
more details please, have you seen the densities?I agree with my namesake (alsu). It only appears to be a normal distribution. The resemblance is only distant. The main differences are the strong outliers in the zero area and very fat tails. Even smart people like Peters write books about it.
I agree with my namesake (alsu). It only seems normal. The resemblance is only distant. The main differences are the strong outburst in the zero area and the very fat tails. Even smart people like Peters write books about it.
How to generate normal from a uniformly distributed oscillator?
No problem, Urain. There is a library of statfunctions in kodobase, there is an inverse of Gaussian one, that's what we need.
It turns out simply: if we give a value uniformly distributed at [0;1], then by applying the inverse of normal distribution, i.e. Ф-1, we get N(0,1), i.e. a standard normal distribution.
It is another matter that it is mauvais ton to generate a normally distributed one like this.
Rosh has an article about another way to generate a normally distributed value.