What is the average length of time it takes to understand the processes and identify some of the hidden patterns in forex? - page 21

 
Trololo:


1- decided what? and which solution is correct, and why? if i initially say that let's say i came up with this problem myself and took another fuzzy logic (and its algorithms can be different) as the basis.

then whose answer is correct?


You opened a trade with a profit of 144 and a loss of 112.

The course went in the wrong direction and you grabbed an elk.

Do you think the course went in the wrong direction? ))))

 
Trololo:


1- decided what? and which solution is correct, and why? if I initially say that, say, I came up with this problem myself and took another fuzzy logic (and its algorithms may be different) as the basis.

whose answer is correct then?


If you were the one who came up with the problem with that (your) answer, that would mean that you don't know how to do it.

Option 3. It is useless to explain. The solution should be simple.

 
I'm clear with you, it's no use.....
 
Trololo:
clear with you, useless.....

There is no pattern in your answer. With the correct answer everything is clear for the continuation of the series and for any such expression in general. In your answer it is not clear what is being drawn from where. First two twos, then two threes. And then? Two fours, or another three, by force: two twos, three threes... And anyway, it's not a row, it's just an unrelated expression, you can swap them around.
 
Integer:

There is no pattern in your answer. With the correct answer, everything is clear for the continuation of the series and for any such expression in general. In your answer, it is not clear what is being drawn from where. First two twos, then two threes. And then? Two fours, or another three, by force: two twos, three threes... In fact, it's not a row, it's just an expression that's not connected, you can swap them around.

I explained earlier that if I had added other rows with conditions - 5,6,7.... rows, then yes, my option could be excluded, but within the given conditions the solution is suitable
 
Integer:

There is no pattern in your answer. With the correct answer, everything is clear for the continuation of the series and for any such expression in general. In your answer, it is not clear what is being drawn from where. First two twos, then two threes. And then? Two fours, or another three, by force: two twos, three threes... And in general it's not a row, it's just expressions not connected to each other, they can be interchanged.


Yep)), I also foolishly swapped the pluses for multiplication:

(2+3)*2=10

(7*7)*2=98

(3+5)*3 =24

(8*6)*3=144

 

From a+b follows c;

Solution: a*(a+b)=c;

 
Avals: also changed the pluses to multiples out of spit:
It doesn't matter anymore....))))
 
Trololo: clear with you, useless....
The solution Avals, Integer, TheXpert and the others who have decided is the simplest one. Yours is just more complicated.
 
ask:


1. I agree.

2. Nothing-just observing (now)

3. Doubting scientific stereotypes. There are a lot of people here with:

a) a colossal baggage of knowledge

b) clearly innovators

c) as a consequence of the first two (a and b) points, scientific innovators with an open mind. I will not say by nickname, everyone has his own favourites, after all. But there are many very interesting posts and people. But one fact is that so far we have not seen any proof that someone in the entire CIS can make more money on Fora than on Volkswagen. Do you know such examples? I do not.


Boy, are you deeply mistaken. There are even people on this forum who do forex professionally and live off it. About the car - you are also mistaken.... There are people who have cars worth more than $100,000.

I do know this for sure.

Reason: