The Sultonov Regression Model (SRM) - claiming to be a mathematical model of the market. - page 34
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
Well here are a couple:
http://www.mathforum.ru/forum/read/1/49327/49582/#49582
http://www.mathforum.ru/forum/read/1/40149/page/1/
That's not all, there by his nickname you can find similar things to what he is trying to demonstrate here.
There are plenty of mathematicians out there, and they could certainly appreciate Yusuf's pioneering formulas he has discovered in mathematics.
There are plenty of clowns out there proving Fermat's theorem or discovering the newest view of elementary things, too.
Here's a couple of them:
http://www.mathforum.ru/forum/read/1/49327/49582/#49582
http://www.mathforum.ru/forum/read/1/40149/page/1/
That's not all, there by his nickname you can find similar things to what he is trying to demonstrate here.
There are plenty of mathematicians out there, and they could certainly appreciate Yusuf's pioneering formulas he has discovered in mathematics.
There are plenty of clowns out there proving Fermat's theorem or discovering the newest view of elementary things, too.
Note the forum motto:An axiom is a truth for which there was not enough evidence.
This could only have been written by people who understand nothing about mathematics at all!
Here's a couple of them:
http://www.mathforum.ru/forum/read/1/49327/49582/#49582
http://www.mathforum.ru/forum/read/1/40149/page/1/
That's not all, there by his nickname you can find similar things to what he is trying to demonstrate here.
There are plenty of mathematicians out there, and they could certainly appreciate Yusuf's pioneering formulas he has discovered in mathematics.
There are plenty of clowns out there proving Fermat's theorem or discovering the newest way of looking at elementary things.
Alexei! You are an adult and accomplished person, all the more so as a moderator.
Let's make a parsing of the pioneering regression model, I think Yusuf is ready, but not everyone can stand the mocking manner of asking without listening to any (detailed or brief) answer, without descending to the level of your opponent, who is trying to make a dullard out of an associate professor. That's why I don't like Rankin Sr. - indulging the crowd...(
Especially since the Gamma function and gamma distributions are not the same thing, although the root is the same - the applications are different.
If Hodja Sultonov used Harmonic numbers - would your irony lessen?
----------
One more thing.
Don't get personal. There's an article, there's an indicator. There's a model.
It's being refined.
Those who don't like a scientific search will ask for a passport and registration... stats and whatnot.
but we will hopefully discuss the model in this thread!
There are plenty ofclowns out there proving Fermat's theorem or discovering the newest view of elementary things .
calling a clown has to have a reason!
Fermat's theorem was finally proved in 1995 by Andrew Wiles.
I'd banish YOU for a day or two!
;)
Only people with no understanding of mathematics could have written that!
Well, what is an axiom as you understand it? The conversation is, of course, about mathematical axioms.
avatara: The Fermat theorem was finally proved in 1995 by Andrew Wiles.
I know that, I know that. But he proved it - and the proof is not elementary. I was referring to clowns like Sorokin, who get into this upper stuff before they've mastered even the basics of higher richematics...
I'd banish YOU for a day or two!
Erm... I've made myself a real autobahn a couple of times before - just when I felt I was overheating. But the forum admins think that's "too much".
I noticed the forum motto:An axiom is a truth for which there was insufficient proof.
Only people with no understanding of mathematics could have written that!
"If you haven't been judged yet, it's not your fault, it's our fault."
Only people with no understanding of criminal law could have written that.)
"If you haven't been convicted yet, it's not your fault, it's our fault".
Only people with no understanding of the law could have written that)
Uh... I've made myself a real autobahn a couple of times before - just when I felt I was overheating. But the forum admins think that's "too much".
ice cubes from the freezer.
on your temples and belly button.
I'm saving myself...
the air conditioning almost gave me pneumonia. (
It's not working at full capacity (+26 is set).
Well, what is an axiom in your understanding? The conversation, of course, is about mathematical axioms.
I know that, I know that. But he proved it - and the proof is by no means elementary. I was referring to clowns like Sorokin, who get into these upper matter, without having mastered even the basics of higher richematics...
Erm... I've made myself a real autobahn a couple of times before - just when I felt I was overheating. But the forum admins think that's "too much".
A mechmatologist is a mathematician who creates new mathematical theories, unlike the rest of the grey mass of mathematicians of all stripes and varieties.
The basic theorem in creating any mathematical theory is Gödel's Incompleteness Theorem, which states (free paraphrase) that in any theory one must have rules, usually called axioms, which cannot be proved within the framework of the theory. Otherwise, if all the propositions are provable - the theory is contradictory.
The fate of axioms is two-fold: either refutation of these axioms (not the sun around the earth, but vice versa) appears outside the framework of the theory to which they belong, and then the theory is considered false, or correction of these axioms with new axioms is proposed and a new theory is born, which covers the old one (For example, parallel lines do not intersect. After 2000 years Lobachevsky questioned this position, t proposed a new geometry in which parallel lines intersect at infinity. Instead of Euclid they got Lobachevsky, but Euclidean geometry works fine on our vegetable gardens).
This is the basis. Don't try to prove an axiom - that's not understanding the essence of building theories.
But it is very useful in any theory to find these unprovable propositions in the theory and discuss them, question them, etc., as this can lead to qualitative leaps in the development of science.
The above slogan on the website of the department of mathematics cannot exist - this is a serious failure to understand the fundamentals of mathematical science.
"If you haven't been convicted yet, it's not your fault, it's our fault".
Only people with no understanding of criminal law could have written that)