Search results

What if it was making 5 consecutive Higher High and Higher Lows in the previous bars and the newest bar was Higher High but Lower Lows .... though Close being equalled to High. Or... Higher Highs and Higher Lows but Open = High and Close = Low??? Or... Also how about the market...

So, finally, after all the posts, we've come to an conclusion that there needs to be a "common definition" of what a "trend" is... via thoughts on noise and random... Well... I feel that programmers are better than discretionary or "subjective" takers on coming up with a definition... so...

Thank you. But I don't understand trendiness... Yet... :( If the model is "pseudo" random.... then wouldn't the trendiness be random in a "pseudo" bias... leading to insignificance of actually having an indicator? You already know what the model is... then it's just a matter of...

"Every aspect human knowledge doesn't know about is random." "Uncertainty represents our human desire for knowledge." Uncertainty = random.

I think I know the content (context) well enough to ask you for some clarification.

So: 1. Most feel the market is not random. 2. All "pseudo"- logic doesn't exist to be significantly represent the market to be considered... Then... What is noise? Is noise random or non-random?

:confused: 1. Random system? Random system on "pseudo"-random data? 2. Introduced trends = Not random. Isn't it??? 3. What's trendiness? You might know but others might not. :confused:

I think nicholaf was being skeptical...

What character in the actual market behavior is rational and/or irrational? Also, in what way does it influence it? Please read back to hanketsurfer's post about his subjective view of chaos and order...

So far people are seem to be saying that markets are not random. Can we all agree that markets are not "random" or do others have other things to say???

1. Nice post. With all the people mentioning market being random in "different" terms... it's a nice "model"... simple and to the point. Hypothetically, there can be other models added like Brownian but it's nice and simple. 2. Obviously, after extensive runs on this model, we'll come up...

Do you actually understand the pseudo??? and his point??? Well... Happy Easter to you too. :D

:D So with all the people "believing" and "placing" a subjective parameter for a trend... There is a subjective significance towards trend.... So... then keeping it subjective... what would be a significant "filter" to extract trends? Even more, would it be possible to "extract" a...

We both know that people are trying to objectify a subjective question... Which is fun in all :D ... but it's about time we have some constructive "opinions" to make this thread more "fun" :D :D :D So would you mind, if you can provide us a "subjective" view of how there is order in chaos.

Well, a definition of noise, which is relevant... Physics: A disturbance, especially a random and persistent disturbance, that obscures or reduces the clarity of a signal. Computer Science: Irrelevant or meaningless data. Statement A: Trends exists in the market. Statement B...

I'd like to add a topic because it seems relevant... Can't non-trend = noise, within some degree of "whatever"? Isn't the one of the point of TA to reduce noise to trade some "move"?

Is the Profit Factor a good measure for systems??? Why??? My logic doesn't find it as significant as others have mentioned in this thread...

So... (again...) when's this thread going Chit-Chat... Anyways... Coco ( the Chicago Zoo monkey) says, " Huhhh... so where the hellz my banana..." NicketScalper and etc.'s wannna offer your "banana" to a zoo monkey? BWAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!! :D

Maybe we all should ask Chicago Zoo's elder-monkey, Coco, for advice... I'm sure Coco will have a better perspective on all this.... Bwahahahahahaahahahahahaha!!!

So... it's like.... ummm... masteurbation??? :confused: :eek: