and wandering around randomly again... - page 43
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
Who made it? Names, surnames, identities?
It's just a random process. All these levels, channels, trends, etc. have nothing to do with reality. That's why all these channelers, trendsetters and others are out, which is perfectly natural.
i knew someone would pick on that word) i thought i'd erase it and write it differently... lazy... i decided to keep it...
as Rochefort said to Cardinal - these songs have no master... they are composed by the people...
I corrected there to Np/(No+Np)=0.5. All conclusions remain unchanged. You don't know how to work with big numbers, including infinite ones.
I don't.
I don't know about that.
Just don't assert what you don't know, and at the same time advise (I don't remember who you answered) to read textbooks.)
Will you answer about the picture?
Infinity can be seen as one infinite series, or it can be seen as an infinite number of series of the same finite length.
Gorg1983:
Про картинку ответите?
Infinity can be regarded as one infinite series, or it can be regarded as an infinite number of series of the same finite length.
N=1000. For infinity this is not serious. Calculate the total difference Np-No for all outcomes. I can almost guarantee that it will not be zero.
You can. But in this case there is no need to average. MO=0 does not mean that the difference tends to zero.
All these TA theories work if you know how to prepare them, or in other words, apply them to certain data. But all these books don't tell you how to cook them.
In fact, one book showing how to separate the random component from the non-random would be enough. And then you can dream up all the variants of TA, each of them would be applicable.
As they say, let's separate the trend from the flat and everything falls into its place, rebounds and breakdowns, trend and many other things from the books. If we have established that it is a trend, it does not matter what type of analysis we use to trade within a trend or a flat, everything will work, it may be better or worse. If you do not know what kind of market you are dealing with, you may ask the analyst what kind of market you are dealing with and what kind of market you are interested in.
Another question is who ordered all these theories and for what purpose.N=1000. For infinity this is not serious. Calculate the cumulative difference Np-No for all outcomes. I can almost guarantee that it will not be zero.
You can. But in this case there is no need to average. MO=0 does not mean that the difference tends to zero.
The difference tends too, albeit slower than the ratio.Just big numbers when divided by each other will give much smaller values, that's the law of large numbers. N=1000 or N=10 is not the point if the number of such series tends to infinity.
Do the maths yourself. You cannot guarantee, as you do not have the life to calculate this amount at infinity in real life.
So why should I count? Why check with home-grown methods something that has been extensively described in the literature and known since the time of Napoleon. Probably even earlier.
Wo-Thomas Bayes (colloquially called Bayes) (1702 - 7 April 1761) was an English mathematician and Presbyterian minister, member of the Royal Society of London (1742). That is, even before his time.
So why should I count? Why check with home-grown methods something that has been extensively described in the literature and known since the time of Napoleon. Probably even earlier.
Wo-Thomas Bayes (colloquially called Bayes) (1702 - 7 April 1761) was an English mathematician and Presbyterian minister, member of the Royal Society of London (1742). That is, even before him.
You're talking to me about the number of eagles and tails, their ratio tends to 1. Naturally with larger numbers the difference between them will increase modulo. But it will increase both in + and - minus, so logically it tends to equilibrium too. We don't seem to understand each other. That's why the Kents are disastrous to the public. It's all mixed up.