From theory to practice - page 1491

New comment
 
Alexander_K:

There's no such thing as complete chaos, Max.

I'm getting tired of showing the charts, but I'll show you again.

AUDCHF last week:

Watch closely. Entry into the trade is green circle, exit is red. In order, from left to right.

In the case of a random process we have 2 trades on the plus side. They are given to us by the Warlock indicator (below), which easily copes with the SB.

And here is the 3rd entry into the trade - the indicator failed. Unsuccessful, bad entry. There is no such movement (highlighted in blue rectangle) in random processes! No, there wasn't and there won't be.

This is a clear trending, deterministic movement.

So, the trick is to be able to distinguish between market phases: random and regular. And earn on it.

Well, it's clear to everyone. So is being able to separate a trending market from a flat market, an upward movement with pullbacks from a downward movement with pullbacks. The problem is that algorithms cannot do that. Only intuition, experience, brain.
And do not lay out these pictures with three deals and some kind of conclusions based on this, it looks amateurish. Have you seen millions of variations of cb charts to claim what may or may not be there?) Of course not.
You're just clinging to hope, faith. And that's bad. In forex it's all time consuming.

But nevertheless, I'm waiting for your pamm. Hopefully at a broker where you will see real drawdowns, not like here, in the signals. The drawdown is there and then it's not. Strange subject))
 
Макс:
Well, what are the variants of graphs sb to say what may or may not be there?
This thread may be renamed "From Theory to Theory". I come here once every few months - only words and miracle charts and it's already 1400 pages long
 
Vladimir Baskakov:
The thread could be renamed "From Theory to Theory". I come here once every few months - only words and miracle charts and it's already 1400 pages long.
This whole forum is full of theorists.
Even in the branches of many of the PAMM account managers, you can read more useful things.
 
Alexander_K:

There is no such thing as complete chaos, Max.

I'm getting tired of showing the charts, but I'll show you again.

AUDCHF last week:

Watch closely. Entry into the trade is green circle, exit is red. In order, from left to right.

In the case of a random process we have 2 trades on the plus side. They are given to us by the Warlock indicator (below), which easily copes with the SB.

And here is the 3rd entry into the trade - the indicator failed. Unsuccessful, bad entry. There is no such movement (highlighted in blue rectangle) in random processes! No, there wasn't and there won't be.

This is a clear trending, deterministic movement.

So, the trick is to be able to distinguish between market phases: random and regular. And earn on it.

So, it is time to move from Kolmogorov's probability and usual random processes to quantum probability and quantum random processes. Although, as a physicist you are probably already familiar with open quantum systems.

 
Alexander_K:

So, the hardest, but achievable task is to be sure that all conditions of this model are fulfilled at the moment of entering the trade. For this purpose, my TS has as many as four (4) keys - parameters that assess how close the current state of the market is to this model.

what are they? kurtosis, asymmetry, heurst and entropy? )

 
multiplicator:

what are they? eccentricity, asymmetry, heurst and entpropy? )

What's so funny?

You don't think it's a working thing? Give me some proof, please.

 
Alexander_K:

What's so funny?

You don't think it's a working thing? Give me some proof, please.

no, it's not a laugh. it's a smile. for the sake of polite conversation)
 
Макс:
Well, it's clear to everyone. Just like being able to separate a trending market from a flat market, an up movement with pullbacks from a down movement with pullbacks. The problem is that the algorithms are unable to do this. Only intuition, experience, brain.
And don't post these pictures with three trades and some inferences based on that, looks amateurish. Have you seen millions of variations of cb charts to say what may or may not be there?) Of course not.
You're just clinging to hope, faith. And that's bad. In forex it's all time consuming.

But nevertheless, I'm waiting for your pamm. Hopefully at a broker where real drawdowns will be visible, not like here, in the signals. The drawdown is there and then it's not. Strange subject))
no, the author's ideas are good.

use some parameters to determine whether the process you are trading is now in the market or not.

have a breakdown indicator to show when the process that is destructive to your trade has started.
 
multiplicator:
No, that's not a laugh. that's a smile. for polite conversation)

)))

I don't use Hirst. Maybe I shouldn't... But kurtosis, asymmetry, and non-parametric ones - definitely. I'm still thinking about autocorrelation and entropy - I need more research.

 
Alexander_K:

What's so funny?

You don't think it's a working thing? Give me some proof, please.

I'll tell you, I read it in my memoirs, and there was an episode
1...148414851486148714881489149014911492149314941495149614971498...1981
New comment