Well..... With all due respect ..... FIB ratios and numbers are not a universal phenommena in financial markets .... Even when considered in stocastic models, there are enough counterexamples in most data to make the extrapolation of any type of universal statement about their occurance meaningless.
Alternative splicing: why opening is more important than close
- Thread starter harrytrader
- Start date
Well..... With all due respect ..... FIB ratios and numbers are not a universal phenommena in financial markets .... Even when considered in stocastic models, there are enough counterexamples in most data to make the extrapolation of any type of universal statement about their occurance meaningless.
Quote from harrytrader:
You nut yourself : what you quote is not from me it is somebody's else quote, you're definitely a no brainer. It is really funny that you don't say anything about pspr when he says that the planets influence are INDISPUTABLE - hahahaha - and on the contrary you are angry because I am showing why people are mystics by confusing cosmology with stock market. If you don't know the difference between Cosmology which is an official science and astrology I'm sorry for you. Are you as INDISPUTABLE as pspr
This is exactly my point Harry. You keep on quoting like a nut, not knowing what you put on these threads. If you have the pretention to sign your pieces with a reference to a mathematics book, we may at minimum expect that you would check and spot a dumb quote like the Pi nonsense. Call me whatever you want, you proved your my point.
I simply thought it my duty to bring up a little point of rigor following your own logic in your lengthy nutty pieces. You better switch to a board for half-witty windbags.
nononsense
Did you just read my SIGNATURE
A new inspirational quote everyday. For Saturday January 24th:
"it should be frankly admitted that in some plants the numbers do not belong to the sequence of f's [Fibonacci numbers] but to the sequence of g's [Lucas numbers] or even to the still more anomalous sequences 3,1,4,5,9,... or 5,2,7,9,16,...
Thus we must face the fact that phyllotaxis is really not a universal law but only a fascinatingly prevalent tendency."
-- H S M Coxeter - "Introduction to Geometry (1961, Wiley)"
And do you know what "Universal" means in SCIENTIFIC CONTEXT ? It doesn't mean that everything in REALITY will conform to that law, it means that it is a CONVERGENCE of MANY LAWS for example the NORMAL LAW is CONVERGENCE of many laws from BINOMIAL TO POISSON, but of course there exists other statistical laws if not how can they converge towards Normal law haha !
Fibonacci sequences is present in 92% among plants species: this is great enough to justify the term universal or if one prefers convergence law.
Fibonacci sequences is present in 92% among plants species: this is great enough to justify the term universal or if one prefers convergence law.
Quote from harrytrader:
Did you just read my SIGNATURE
A new inspirational quote everyday. For Saturday January 24th:
"it should be frankly admitted that in some plants the numbers do not belong to the sequence of f's [Fibonacci numbers] but to the sequence of g's [Lucas numbers] or even to the still more anomalous sequences 3,1,4,5,9,... or 5,2,7,9,16,...
Thus we must face the fact that phyllotaxis is really not a universal law but only a fascinatingly prevalent tendency."
-- H S M Coxeter - "Introduction to Geometry (1961, Wiley)"
Very funny indeed, I have no PI reference in my model, I quote the mystics, do I have the right to quote them since I want to refer to them. You are dishonoring yourself with you intellectual dishonesty. PI is used by some analysts in stock market do you know that or you prefer to hide your head in the sand pretending that some traders don't use that kind of reasoning ? Do I have the right to talk about Gann or would you like to burn him as if he didn't exist in history of trading hahaha !
BTW what do you think about pspr pretention that planets influence are "indisputable" using his own term: it seems that you don't have much pretention to defend rationality in that case ... so forgive me if I want to fight his idioties since you don't want to do it.
P.S.: the book I quoted is not written by a mathematician but by a physician, this makes a big difference if you don't know that physics concerns real things.
BTW what do you think about pspr pretention that planets influence are "indisputable" using his own term: it seems that you don't have much pretention to defend rationality in that case ... so forgive me if I want to fight his idioties since you don't want to do it.
P.S.: the book I quoted is not written by a mathematician but by a physician, this makes a big difference if you don't know that physics concerns real things.
Now I have nothing against Gann as a person, if I reject his astrology explanation there are things from Gann that I can confirm with my model and I won't dismiss to say that what he says is true for some points. I'm not an Ayatollah like you that makes claims just on personal opinions but I use an econometric model for that.
Critical Value=10703.98 (see SOC thread http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=27503&perpage=6&pagenumber=1) reached at yesterday's high=10705.18 (so within 2 points standard error):
<IMG SRC=http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=418055>
<IMG SRC=http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=418055>
An other example of Universal number is Feigenbaum constant = 4.66 in chaos theory (see the thread on attractors:
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=335367&highlight=attractor#post335367)
It is said by physicians to be universal because it is independant of the form of the function considered, it doesn't imply that every non linear system functions at this number, it means that it is the limit of systems whatever their functional form. So you "nutty" yourself if you don't know what Universal means in science. I'm perhaps a nuts but some people are at least ignoring that they are nuts themselves.
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=335367&highlight=attractor#post335367)
It is said by physicians to be universal because it is independant of the form of the function considered, it doesn't imply that every non linear system functions at this number, it means that it is the limit of systems whatever their functional form. So you "nutty" yourself if you don't know what Universal means in science. I'm perhaps a nuts but some people are at least ignoring that they are nuts themselves
.How lucky again I am: market never pass the critical value it faint to retest it at opening within two points at 10701
Would you mind to tell me if Sornette and Bouchaud are also nutty ? see
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=27695
P.S.: did IBM gave a Prize to a "nutty" like Bouchaud ?
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=353728&highlight=bouchaud#post353728
As promised this is the interesting audio conference from Jean Philippe Bouchaud - a brilliant guy since he was the winner of young researchers from IBM in 1990 and he is specialised in market's research since 1992.
http://online.itp.ucsb.edu/online/bblunch/bouchaud/
(download the file here as others don't seem to work: http://online.itp.ucsb.edu/download/bblunch/bouchaud.rm)