From theory to practice - page 902
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
Already hinted at. Don't contact me at any time.
Of course not.
But it's my duty to keep young minds from being foolhardy.
.
added a position.
Friends! Can we stop talking shit about each other? You're all smart behind the monitors.I'm sorry.
It's only about toilets and shit from you for the next ten pages.
Sometimes a situation calls for a tough reaction to what's going on. And you're all about the shit. Don't mix it with the marmalade.)
It's one thing to mention it, it's another to be it. I don't want to, but it's up to everyone else how they want it.
If you are this substance, that is your own right. What's it got to do with us?
I see you can't read very well... but that's all right.
Come on. Scorpios can respond to the most vulgar attacks. You have to be careful what you say to them)). Others might think about using balanced language, too.
.
38:20
Academician Fesenko: "That's what experimentation means. No theory could have predicted this. Well now the theorists will come up with something."
This is to better understand the role of experiment in theoretical reasoning. ;)
In stochastic process models, the so-called "mean" is a measure of the central tendency of the process. The dispersion formulas for both Gaussian process and Laplace process assume that a certain distribution of linear deviations must be formed in relation to this measure.
And if you're using a formula to calculate the variance for a Gaussian process, be kind enough to choose a measure around which a normal distribution is formed.
You can't use variance and mean separately as you wish - they are all interrelated.
P.S. I don't want to write anything, so that fools like Tarabanov don't read it, but I have to...
Sorry, dummies like Tarabanov, to this day believe that it is better to choose a measure first, and then determine which formula to use.
I'm sorry, the morons like Tarabanov, to this day believe that it's better to choose a measure first and then decide which formula to use.
I wonder. How can you see the process of an event by limiting yourself to a narrow period ?
And this is a physicist speaking from his own bell tower, not you.
I wonder. How can you see the process of an event by limiting yourself to a narrow period?
And this is a physicist speaking from his own bell tower. Not you.
Who's a physicist?