Discussion of article "The price movement model and its main provisions (Part 2): Probabilistic price field evolution equation and the occurrence of the observed random walk" - page 3
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
What you call "wave probability field", I imagine a field of collective unconscious, in the spirit of Pauli - Jung, I.Danilevsky.
"The price probability waves spreading in their emergent space are generated, in essence, by the entire financial and economic superstructure of human civilisation...". The financial and economic superstructure is, first of all, the psyche, and the psyche has a number of differences from physics (although many laws are equally applicable).
The mental field of the participants of the process - from ordinary traders to the world elite - is extremely heterogeneous and highly dynamic. And at the same time it is unified, interconnected and interdependent.
It is rather difficult to identify complete analogues of behaviour of mental and physical systems; official science does not deal with this, and individual researchers use various terms from different fields of science. That is, even if we are talking about something intuitively understandable, it is very difficult to understand the general sense of reasoning, and even more so, to express it precisely in the form of a mathematical problem. For example, the concept of "resonance" in physics can be expressed by a formula, but try to precisely define the formula of "public resonance" for some event.
"qualitatively identical force fields from different sources (if any) interfere, generating a single field, and there are no crossings of the lines of the single force field and cannot be".
(1) The world-renowned psychologist Kurt Lewin has a book called Field Theory in the Social Sciences. The essence of his theory is that each person has his own "living space", which is called a "personal field". These fields intersect, creating, in fact, the entire social (including economic) space.
The drawings to the problem are an attempt to depict some dynamics of related processes, for example, a ball rolls down a wide groove with a slight incline, which is crossed by a narrower and steeper groove. How to calculate the trajectory of further motion?
(2) The question is not an idle one, it is directly related to the topic at hand.
" Your equationh = sqrt(R ^2 - (nt)^2)issimply the equation of a circle." It is an ellipse.
I attach an explanatory picture.
(2) It doesn't really matter. In this situation ellipse or circle are just conventional names of your curve. The point is that the axes are qualitatively different, one axis is time, the other is price. An ellipse is defined as a geometric place of points for which the sum of distances from its two focal points is a constant value. Therefore, in order to strictly speak about the name of your curve, it is first necessary to introduce a unified metric in such a price-time space, i.e. an algorithm for determining distances between any of its points.
I just wanted to tell you there that you should be more precise in the description of the problem. You should have at least mentioned that it should be t << R / n , i . e. a small section of the curve is considered , because your parameterisation is not suitable for large sections .
Therefore, as Aleksey Nikolayev correctly noted, it is desirable for you to study a little maths and it does not matter that there is no exhaustive mathematical theory that describes the market. Mathematics is a language of strict description of reality and if you want to calculate something (and you do, because you compose tasks), you need to know mathematics and be able to set tasks mathematically correct and no philosophy can replace it. Unstrict reasoning with transferring some philosophical vague notions into the sphere of exact description of phenomena will only confuse you.
(1) Here, for example
Inquiring # :
(1) The world-renowned psychologist Kurt Lewin has a book called Field Theory in the Social Sciences. The essence of his theory is that each person has their own "living space", which is called a "personal field". These fields intersect, creating, in fact, the entire social (including economic) space.
than you, as it seems to you, refute my quotation about impossibility of intersection of force lines of the field (which trivially follows from the fact that the force in one spatial point always has one direction, not many).
Inquiring # :
What you call a "wave probability field", I imagine a field of the collective unconscious, in the spirit of Pauli-Jung, I.Danilevsky.
I introduced emergent space as a continuum in which price waves propagate. This continuum is introduced formally and establishing the way of its existence, though interesting, does not give anything for calculations. It is quite possible that its existence is connected with some collective mental processes, or maybe not. It is not important for calculations and obtaining concrete results.
The approach of the author of the article is interesting primarily for its depth, novelty and originality in the way he does it.
Thank you, I do my best.
You should have at least mentioned that it should be t << R / n
Given this remark, is the problem solvable?
Unstrict reasoning with transferring some philosophical vague notions into the sphere of precise description of phenomena will only confuse you.
Strict assumption of price volatility + 3 sigma will only lead to deposit drain.
In general, I did not intend to pick a fight with anyone. I expressed my opinion that probability theory and mathematical statistics are not applicable to the study of exchange processes. The only way is non-linear dynamics in quantum field.
Theorver with matstat and how they are used in radio physics, for example. This will allow to understand that uncertainty, determinism and cyclicity are quite coexisting in the same phenomenon.
By the way, the concept of randomness is not mathematically meaningful and is only used as part of the terms in theorver.
I will certainly take into account your opinion that stock trading is the same as radiophysics.
I will certainly consider your opinion that stock trading is the same as radiophysics.
This is not my opinion, but the opinion of those who are looking for cycles on the market) Believe me, you are far from the first who is looking for them there) I suggest only to derive some benefit (studying theorising and matstat) from this pointless activity.
With this observation in mind, is the problem solvable?
There are many more remarks here. For a problem to be solvable, it is necessary that all its description be correct. You yourself asked my advice when you said that nobody has solved this problem. No one will ever solve it in this form. Only Ivan the Fool successfully solved the problem "Go there without knowing the code, find that without knowing what". Your ideas may even be brilliant, but they must be expressed accurately and correctly, otherwise no one will distinguish them from nonsense.
To models of price behaviour, potential fields and so on.
There is a lot of noise in the market, and its physics (physical structure) does not often manifest itself. Today it was lucky: EUR interest rate hike caused speculative movement back and forth and fading cancellation of the result.
If you like radio physics so much, highlight such fragments where the signal is clearly higher than noise and the signal (and noise too) can be studied. It is useless to start with other places or with the whole history at once.
I expressed my opinion that probability theory and mathematical statistics are not applicable to the study of stock exchange processes. The only way is non-linear dynamics in quantum field.
So I wrote about the same in the article, more precisely, I wrote that they are not applicable to analyse the price formation process, but of course there are many other processes on the stock exchange, for analysis of which probability theory and mathematical statistics work quite correctly.
and modern approaches of economic science based on game theory. Unlike probabilistic uncertainty, game uncertainty is poorly amenable to study, but Nash equilibrium theory allows reducing the latter to the study of the former. Unfortunately, the current level of development of game theory is not high enough to build adequate (from the point of view of practice) game models of the market, so (for practical purposes) usually build probabilistic models based on empirical considerations.
Valuable comments. By the way, the following paper is partly based on game representations, again based on a probabilistic model.