From theory to practice - page 1046
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
Alexei, "Do not cast your pearls before swine..."
"And many false prophets shall appear, ..."
(1) It is unclear why you have referred Savonarola to mathematics. He is one of the spiritual fathers of the "take and divide" approach, and also an example of how nothing good can come of it. (2) If you read normal books (Plato, Aristotle, etc.) then (3) you would understand why this is the case.
(1) Did I write somewhere that Savanrola is a mathematician? Do you have a problem with the logic of reading?
(2) How do you know what I've read and what I haven't?
(3) Judging by your kindergarten level of reasoning, I know incomparably better than you what is going on.
Here Alexander raised the question of the sum of returns, i.e. selecting the sum of so many returns that they would describe some kind of pattern
is there any evidence that this has any validity at all?
for example, and then compare such a series with the initial one, find some divergences and so on. The method of trivial enumeration.(1) Did I write somewhere that Savanrola is a mathematician? Do you have a problem with the logic of reading?
(2) How do you know what I've read and what I haven't?
(3) Judging by your kindergarten level of reasoning, I understand incomparably better than you what and how things happen.
How else could your suggestion to promote me beyond mathematics, made in response to my suggestion that you read about Savonarola, be perceived? Perhaps you meant something else, but I am not telepathic. That is why you are the one who has a problem with logic (presentation of the text). So you certainly have not read Aristotle (the founder of logic).
Here Alexander raised the question of the sum of returns, i.e. selecting the sum of so many returns that they would describe some kind of pattern
is there any evidence that this has any validity at all? can you read it somewhere?
Let's suppose, to correlate then such series with initial one, to find some divergences and so forth.and what can be counted if the nature of the origin of returns has not even been guessed?
What kind of physics is this - it's guessing. On historical data it is possible to fit a formula that describes them all in sufficient detail. Only it cannot predict anything, because there is no basis :-)
Even for known prime numbers there is a fairly compact formula. But it does not predict the following
How else could your suggestion to advance me beyond mathematics, made in response to my suggestion that you read about Savonarola, be perceived? Perhaps you meant something else, but I am not telepathic. That is why you are the one who has a problem with logic. So you certainly have not read Aristotle (the founder of logic).
If you look at logic, you can see your attitude to your interlocutors.
You do not even hide it))
Everyone is such a sheep and I am so clever!!!!
and what can be counted when the nature of the origin of the returnees has not even been speculated upon?
What kind of physics this is - it's guessing. You can use historical data to fit a formula that describes them all in sufficient detail. Only you can't predict anything from it because there is no basis :-)
Even for known prime numbers there is a fairly compact formula. But it does not predict the following
Well validate them, of course. If the pattern is often repeated then why not the internet. Suppose weekly, monthly, daily returns. I would rotate them in various combinations, obtaining some predictable periodic patterns. Recalculate sometimes.
or would it be the same as a Fourier? or not. And if you enter the ratio of price to cumulative return with a chosen range of lags and this ratio find stationarity, peace and tranquillityand what can be counted when the nature of the origin of the returnees has not even been speculated upon ?
What kind of physics that is is guesswork. It is possible to fit a formula from historical data that describes them all in sufficient detail. Only you can't predict anything from it because there is no basis :-)
Even for known prime numbers there is a fairly compact formula. But it does not predict the following
I think it's just a matter of hoping for some "inertia" in the behaviour of these returns. What Adam Smith in "The Gambling Game" compared to Newton's first law.
I think it's just a matter of hoping for some "inertia" in the behaviour of these returnees. What Adam Smith in "Gambling for Money" compared to Newton's first law.
I was tempted to write an enumerator, like you did in the last article about gaps... but something like that. Or, I could just try arbitrary price patterns with statistics output.