Interesting article.

Interesting Article......but Niederhoffer has talked about such stuff for decades. At UofC he has a few papers written on Luner effects, weather Patterns and other electronic current patterns that can simulate the market, effect the market, etc.

Very odd stuff, but interesting.
 
Quote from ertrader1:

Interesting Article......but Niederhoffer has talked about such stuff for decades. At UofC he has a few papers written on Luner effects, weather Patterns and other electronic current patterns that can simulate the market, effect the market, etc.

Very odd stuff, but interesting.
More...

Its not really interesting ..... this stuff has been pitched for decades. Its amazing to me how many people on the floor of the Merc - usually those heading for account blowouts looking for anything to help them - when I was there would consider spending two minutes of their time on this ......

.. And IMHO just because ther was some connection to UofC only proves to me that not everyone at UofC is that bright ..... Lots of stuff at academic institutions is looked at when people have a bit of free time and many times it is merely to refute a claim.

Long story short: look in detail at this and it ceases to be of interest.

I know of no study in a peer reviewed journal that shows correlations of financial markets to lunar cycles. If there is a such a conclusive study then please cite the references here ....
 
...it would be truly extraordinary if you had indeed talked to William of Occam, since he lived in the twelfth century. Could you arrange a seance for me? Or are you corresponding with us from there?

Or be it could one some jiving us talk self to? Harryman? Mantrader?

Only explanation rational other talk we random salad word generator to.
 
This is a study made on researchers publications on the use of parametric tests :

"Restrictions of parametric tests

Ignore these restrictions and go ahead with the analysis. Hopefully your thesis advisor or the journal editor falls asleep while reading your paper. Indeed, this is a common practice. After reviewing over 400 large data sets, Micceri (1989) found that the great majority of data collected in behavioral sciences do not follow univariate normal distributions. Breckler (1990) reviewed 72 articles in personality and social psychology journals and found that only 19% acknowledges the assumption of multivariate normality, and less than 10% considered whether this assumption had been violated. Having reviewed articles in 17 journals, Keselman et al(1998) found that researchers rarely verify that validity assumptions are satisfied and they typically use analyzes that are nonrobust to assumption violations."

:D

This is also said by a statistician :
"In my experience, many researchers do not even know what a "parametric test" is and what specific assumptions are attached to different tests. To conduct responsible research, one should contemplate the philosophical paradigms of different schools of thought, the pros and cons of different techniques, the research question, as well as the data structure. The preceding options are not mutually exclusive. Rather than they can be used together to compliment each other and to verify the results. For example, Wilcox (1998, 2001) suggested that the control of Type I error can be improved by resampling trimmed means."

DO YOU SEE THE TERM "PARADIGM" I MYSELF OFTEN TALK ABOUT ?

Quote from harrytrader:

Strange sentence ? sorry this is not an invention from me, this a well known classical flaw that every professional statistician is aware of especially for psychology, sociology and economical fields, and specifically the expression "hidden variable" is the OFFICIAL TERM used in statistical field. These hidden variables rarely appear in physical field since the laws are generally known or at least deterministic enough whereas they are predominant in human activities fields. The rest of what you answered is just the illustration that you ignore the potential existence of these hidden variables. If these hidden variables were evident, be assured that they wouldn't be invented and that so many statistical studies in the human fields although conducted as seriously as they could be as for their data collection and hypothesis tests wouldn't be invalidated as for their conclusion.
It is true that at school, teachers wil rarely learn you about them since they only give the basics and illustrate them in physical field. As for myself I first learn and experience them in food industries where we were accustomed to do psychological tests for assessing (or rather trying to assess) consumers preferences. At that time, for professional reason, I used to read a few books about psychological statistical tests and there were illustrating the difficulty of using statistical tests in such field and give many cases of flaw due to the reason above and warned that any conclusion shouldn't be drawn without multiple checks and wait for possible invalidation by someone. That's why I pretend to say what I said.
More...
 
Conclusion: be carefull with research publications in psychological fields, behind the apparent rigor of statistical formulas, craps can be well hidden when the basic premisces for the methodology are not even checked. Sometimes the very reason why they are not checked in psychological field is that this field is well different from physics field and that the researcher conciously or unconciously omitted it. That is why I have always said that a long as you don't know some deterministic law or at least some fundamental factors that are rationally justified as sure premisces the statistical test although significant - and sometimes only apparently - can be very doubtful at least as for their interpretation.

Quote from harrytrader:

This is a study made on researchers publications on the use of parametric tests :

"Restrictions of parametric tests

Ignore these restrictions and go ahead with the analysis. Hopefully your thesis advisor or the journal editor falls asleep while reading your paper. Indeed, this is a common practice. After reviewing over 400 large data sets, Micceri (1989) found that the great majority of data collected in behavioral sciences do not follow univariate normal distributions. Breckler (1990) reviewed 72 articles in personality and social psychology journals and found that only 19% acknowledges the assumption of multivariate normality, and less than 10% considered whether this assumption had been violated. Having reviewed articles in 17 journals, Keselman et al(1998) found that researchers rarely verify that validity assumptions are satisfied and they typically use analyzes that are nonrobust to assumption violations."

:D

This is also said by a statistician :
"In my experience, many researchers do not even know what a "parametric test" is and what specific assumptions are attached to different tests. To conduct responsible research, one should contemplate the philosophical paradigms of different schools of thought, the pros and cons of different techniques, the research question, as well as the data structure. The preceding options are not mutually exclusive. Rather than they can be used together to compliment each other and to verify the results. For example, Wilcox (1998, 2001) suggested that the control of Type I error can be improved by resampling trimmed means."

DO YOU SEE THE TERM "PARADIGM" I MYSELF OFTEN TALK ABOUT ?
More...
 
I agree....Lunar cycles and trading are a far reach. I just find it interesting reading. As far as VIC is concerned, he is a very interesting person. And, he is doing very very well these days by not using lunar cycle theory. LOL
 
Quote from ertrader1:

I agree....Lunar cycles and trading are a far reach. I just find it interesting reading. As far as VIC is concerned, he is a very interesting person. And, he is doing very very well these days by not using lunar cycle theory. LOL
More...

Hey ert.

Hey H.T. I love to read your stuff.:D :)

DUDE. I had a client once that was in to Astrology and the like.
Need I say that he made my commissions for the month. OH BOY!!

As an X-Futures/Commodities Broker...............I LOVE THESE TYPES OF TRADERS.........THEY MADE ME RICH!!!!:D
 
Quote from hypostomus:

"...it would be truly extraordinary if you had indeed talked to William of Occam, since he lived in the twelfth century. "


this is why he did not come back ...


peace
More...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top