Search results

well I care about this topic, if you don't then why did you read 3 pages and post? wanting to understand the right/wrong about the nature of markets is about ego? ok, got it, thanks

The thing that people don't get is that active trading is necessary for maintaining some level of market efficiency. If the market was perfectly efficient there would be no reward for active trading - everyone would be a passive indexer - for example in the equities space. However, by doing...

well, the pure academic doesn't really care... it's more or less just a very nice playground for mathematics... (that is with the assumption of an efficient market) Academics have cared about the viability of trading, that's one of the reasons they study these things. Many of the Wall...

Circadian, you really think the quants will succeed? I have my doubts from the standpoint that in order to do that you will need to get a decent quant model for the individual agents- people. We are talking about a quantitative predictive model for the actions of people, not in my lifetime I...

I didn't start this thread to debate random walk, I am quite convinced random walk is strictly wrong. I am simply pointing out to all the knuckleheads who want to keep insisting that academics has concluded the markets are efficient, they badly need to upgrade from econ 1.0 to the latest econ 2008.

Use of theories to explain observations. Sounds a lot like science. volente, you really need to stop talking about things you know nothing about. I would explain it again, but I'm tired of your sophistry.

I think the record needs clearing up here, many recent academic articles dispute efficient market hypothesis to one degree or another. One thing people should know about economics is that there are no 'laws' and academics keep changing academics. let's see if I can dig up a few.... In an...

The last sentence is an irritatingly common misrepresentation of faith. Faith is not believing despite the lack of evidence, faith is believing despite the fact that the evidence falls short of proof. Anyway, Davies is going to argue that science, like religion, is ultimately based on faith...

Now consider our incredibly complex sense organs. incrediby complex only to you, subjective and irrelevent We rely on them to provide information about the physical world. not for scientific purposes... we use instruments to make measurements I rely on eyesight, for example...

why do people keep taking polls then later complain about the lack of honesty in ET? dude, this is the internet, why bother?

In a world full of son-of-a-bitches I offer you a safe trusting haven. Just wire me your funds to my Cayman account and I will guarantee you will not have to worry about that money ever again.

Mav, you know as well as anyone that science is still a very limitied limited concept. Try using it to measure love or to show that love exists. Of course it is limited, but it is infinitely more beneficial than superstition/religion and a 2000 year old storybook. Love is not a...

... all this high finance is mostly a cover for generating wealth while producing NOTHING of value. A nice scam if you die before its uncovered As long as it is done legally why should we have a problem? Sitting at home trading stocks doesn't produce shit as well.

I'm working on getting prominent Jewish Americans, folks whose community was damaged by a corrupt and captured SEC, to help me force immediate change. So far, I have had some success. Many prominent people read these threads; some PM's I have received have been very instrumental to...

You place "faith" in what others believe until they decide to change their minds. no, I weigh all the evidence myself and perform my own measurements if possible, or needed. Unlike religion where there is no evidence or measurements that can be made. "The others' disagree amongst themselves...

meow However I think the larger point is that socialism seems to be the endpoint for most societies. Too many incentives for politicians, the corrupt, and the dumb masses. We are outnumbered by about a hundred to one so keep dreaming.

One could argue that GoD is the process by which all things seem to be. However, regarding the big bang and evolution, we must look at motive and intent. Intent can be another word for intelligent design. What was the intent? *Our Father* starts with what is natural, GoD, to make a miracle...

Come on my atheist friends, I still await the answer to the simple question. Why is it called scientific theory and not scientific fact ? So far all I have seen is some pathetic ad hominem from the scholars. I don't really expect anyone to answer it truthfully because the very answer is...

But while there is plenty of Hebrew-Christian evidence for faith; evidence for faith! well that about sums up the intellectual fortitude of the theists.

Then why is it called scientific theory and not scientific fact ? you have no clue what you are talking about volente, all you can do is parrot the same old stupid arguments from creationists.