and wandering around randomly again... - page 42
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
Do you need a course in probability theory to justify it? Books will prove it better than I can.
Answer accepted!
It tends towards 0, because the number of eagles and tails at infinity is equal.
Is it?
Do you need a course in probability theory to justify it? Books will do a better job of justifying it than I do.
so what? .... the same thing will happen....
anyway, people don't like it.... you don't like sb... but it's the most perfect market model ... not completely accurate, but there are no other more accurate models ... and there is no model - there is no scientific (logical, rational, reliable ... choose any word) justification of traders' moves.... and the game of luck is considered equal to the deal ...
that's why options are valued based on this simple model...there were attempts to consider volatility clustering like GARCH models and it all crashed and despite these attempts to make something more accurate in option valuation went back to sb....
ps: ok don't like this model, give me an alternative.... do you gentlemen traders? at least one model is more accurate than the theory of the efficient market...
Novi, to understand what you wrote, would you decipher what "sb..." ? Please, have some respect for the readers. And about random function (RF), every RF has its characteristics: mean, variance, autocorrelation function. They can be used for trading. For example, if SF dispersion is small, we can try range trading: from top to middle. It is harder to trade along the trend, as it is not clear when the trend will end.
I looked at your profile. you have been telling this crap on this forum since 2012! 5 years! You should have asked me first and I would have explained everything.
You should have spent 5 years on something valuable.
there you go...
If I had known that this moron would trash the thread, I would not have created this thread at all(((
I wanted to discuss an interesting issue with smart normal people but this imbecile came here with his MOTION..........
Novi, to understand what you wrote, would you decipher what "sb..." ? Please, have some respect for the readers. And about random function (RF), every RF has its characteristics: mean, variance, autocorrelation function. They can be used for trading. For example, if SF dispersion is small, we can try range trading: from top to middle. On the trend is more difficult, as it is not clear when the trend will end.
If you read carefully you'd see that I already described it, that every random has a set of unique parameters and characteristics... I'm not disputing it, it's true...
but randomness doesn't make it any less random.... though knowing these characteristics it's possible to predict what can be expected from a time series and what cannot...
I don't know, but the distribution of market quotes is done in such a clever way to get everyone in trouble, for all strategies... for those who are trend-following they are stopped on the saw, and channel-followers are knocked out by trends, martingaleurs are stopped in areas of extra-high volatility and no-go movement, conservatives simply are not allowed to earn, and so on and so on...
there's probably no way of making money that's more difficult than trading...because of perfect competition...
Is it?
No TV course has ever substantiated this. At infinity is equal (and not even equal, but tends in the limit to...) not quantity, but ratio No/(No+Np)=0.5. The difference |No-Np| can be at least infinity.Well, No/(No+Np)=0.5, No=0.5No+0.5Np No=Np
I'm already confused who's talking about what.
But the distribution of market quotes is done in such a clever way to get everyone in, for all strategies... for those who are trend-following they are stopped on the saw, while channel-followers are knocked out by trends, martingaleurs are stopped in areas of ultra-high volatility and no-go movements, conservatives are simply not allowed to earn, and so on and so forth...
Who did this? Names, surnames, handshakes?
It's just a random process. All these levels, channels, trends, etc. have nothing to do with reality. So all these channelers, trendsetters and others are out of luck, which is only natural.
Who made it? Names, names, identities?
It's just a random process. All these levels, channels, trends, etc. have nothing to do with reality. So all these channelers, trendsetters and others are out of luck, which is only natural.
You are contradicting yourself. You have statistics with positive mo, you said it yourself. So if you have separated a random component from a non-random one (within certain limits), even if you have not realized it yourself, then why shouldn't these - channels, trends and other things from TA - work on this positive statistic too. Applying TA to everything - of course it won't do anything. But on certain data, why wouldn't it work. That's what the phrase is, you have to be able to prepare it (TA), to run it on certain data, in context.
Well, No/(No+Np)=0.5, No=0.5No+0.5Np No=Np
I'm already confused by who's talking about what.
Tends to 0 even as the number of eagles and tails at infinity is equal.
The number of heads and tails can vary by any number, including infinity. The probability that "the number of eagles and tails at infinity is equal" is infinitesimal at all.
Let X=infinity. Np=X, No=X+10^60 -> Np/(No+Np)=0.5 and |Np-No|=10^60.
Again.
The number of heads and tails can vary by any number, including infinity. The probability that "the number of eagles and tails at infinity is equal" is generally infinitesimal.
Let X=infinity. Np=X, No=X+10^60 -> Np/No=0.5 and |Np-No|=10^60.