Forget random quotes - page 15

New comment
 
faa1947:
We can summarise the interim summary of our conversation: Empty, empty .....There's a fog and a lot of meaning.

Well, you can look at yourself from the outside :)

And unlike you, he can back up what he says with stats.

 
yosuf:

Why not? It is precisely under market conditions that the price itself returns to an equilibrium state through the law of supply and demand. Suppose the price goes up, demand goes down, sellers have to lower the price and vice versa when the price goes down.

My deduction of the relationship between profit and price clearly shows this ability of price, and it follows that there is only one optimum price in the market which secures the maximum profit.

You must study the market and not ascribe any fantastic properties to it. In fact the price does not seek any equilibrium, it's all a fantasy. All crises show it precisely. In the 20th century, special measures were introduced on the markets (in America, the biggest market). But the market is more cunning.

 
HideYourRichess:

You have to study the market rather than attribute some fantastic properties to it. In reality, the price does not seek any equilibrium, it is a fantasy. All crises show it precisely. In the 20th century, special measures were introduced on the markets (in America, the biggest market). But the market is more cunning.

If you don't like the equilibrium price, you can replace it with the more fashionable synonym 'fair' price. They just tried to question the law of supply and demand, for which the Nobel Prize in economics was awarded to Engel in the 10th year (among others).
 
HideYourRichess:

You are the one dealing with time series. And I have the same question again - where is the justification that price = time series? Because it's convenient for you? Because that's the way it's usually done?

Oh, come on. The causal relationship between price and time has already been discussed many times, including in the Hearst index thread. There are sufficiently serious works (just read Peters), which directly states that the price, albeit in a weaker form, but it depends on time. Reread the last pages of the above thread. There I did some independent research with my methods, which confirms the deterministic nature of price behavior. Determinism detection is based on the simple principle of particle dispersion. If the particle does not remember its past state, the distance travelled by it will converge to the square root of N steps or N^0.5. But if the degree is qualitatively different from 0.5 - then we are dealing with a definite time dependence, because in order to travel a longer (or shorter) distance the particle must remember its "past" state to make a move in the same (or backward) direction. And this is the time dependence. And rather non-trivial statistical methods for all markets obtain characteristics of this dispersion qualitatively different from white noise indicating a clear time dependence of the studied series.
 
HideYourRichess:

You have to study the market rather than attribute some fantastic properties to it. In reality, the price does not seek any equilibrium, it is a fantasy. All crises show it precisely. In the 20th century, special measures were introduced on the markets (in America, the biggest market). But the market is more cunning.

And the global financial crises are vivid proof that prices depend on time. In 10,000 years you will not get the dramatic collapses that we see in the real markets.
 
C-4:
In order to travel a longer (or shorter) distance, a particle must remember its "past" state in order to move in the same (or opposite) direction.
... or it can move in a fractal medium which either "pushes" it at the nodes (we get a little bit more than 0.5) or slightly "slows" it down (here we will see a spread of a little less than 0.5). In any case, there is a non-zero average vector of so to speak energy exchange with the environment.
 
C-4:
And the global financial crises are vivid proof of the time-dependence of prices. You won't get the kind of outstanding collapses we see in real markets in 10,000 years on "unmemorable" rows.
Exactly! +100
 

Many of the arguments here remind me of this. I recommend everyone take a look at it, because sometimes we forget:

https://www.mql5.com/go?link=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Hl4iDfARv8

"...any dynamic transition process does not care about time as we understand it, in the bowels of which proper time is formed and since these processes proceed in the differential domain..."

"The stick is something infinite" (c)

"Putting the mind aside and just watching silently - without a single thought, without preconceptions about reality - that is the healthy way to experience reality. And you will discover a completely different reality." (c)

 
Mathemat:

1. no comment. Once again you are alluding to your perceptions, but you are not going to discuss them substantively.

2. Do not speak for everyone else except for yourself. To talk to everyone else and separate yourself from yourself is a very bad trick, it is called trolling.

And secondly, how can you not absolutise it when it is almost the only reliable information we are given. Even the news is often fake.

P.S. No offence to "fundamentalist", I didn't mean any religious factors :)

1. I don't even know what to say.

2. ???

 
faa1947:

Random wandering, the efficient market and other nonsense with the word random.

Please read here.

I hope we never have to calculate probability and normal distribution law in this forum again.

Long live trends, well maybe silenced by free market believing idiots.

Let it be!

Amen.

1...8910111213141516171819202122...66
New comment
Reason: