Intuition Amplifiers 2

<b>Quote from Xspurt:

Duh! Is no one going to answer the question?

Okay I'll answer that with 100% certainty provided the choice is between a truly random generated chart and a true market chart. Based on that premise, this is a real market chart and I will bet my life on it.

True randomness has no life form driving it and no mathematical relationship. This exhibits the true to life flow of money and has dozens of perfect mathematical relationships.

Slam Dunk - it's for real

The markets are not random! This chart PROVES it. Can't ya all see it?</B>

the market is pseudo random, not random, hence the difference.

math relationships are all over nature, it's not a sign of some kind of code.

surf
 
Quote from marketsurfer:

I betcha nodoji, cornix, hershey and the other hindsite biased deluded souls would say they would make money on that chart. surf
More...

Somewhat similar look doesn't mean exactly the same real-life behavior.

At the first glance some random generated charts may look similar to real market charts, but behavior at certain points will be different, cause human behavior is not random, it's subject to repeating patterns.
 
Quote from marketsurfer:


the market is pseudo random, not random, hence the difference.

math relationships are all over nature, it's not a sign of some kind of code.

surf
More...

What is the difference between random and "pseudo-random"?
 
Quote from marketsurfer:

the market is pseudo random, not random

surf
More...

You know that a pseudo random number sequence is totally predictable, right? Whereas a true random sequence isn't?

:p
 
Quote from marketsurfer:

<b>

the market is pseudo random, not random, hence the difference.

math relationships are all over nature, it's not a sign of some kind of code.

surf
More...

Correct! As Tob points out, you're in total agreement with me.

Once you see a mathematical relationship that in and of itself is sufficient to profit from. As far as a code is concerned, I never thought of that. Perhaps an alien ET is trying to communicate and I missed it?

btw Tob, this is Yoohoo, thanks for the input :)
 
Quote from tobbe:

You know that a pseudo random number sequence is totally predictable, right? Whereas a true random sequence isn't?

:p
More...

Can you "totally predict" the market? if not, why not based on the above?
 
Although I do enjoy the discussion, I feel that I should try to steer this thread to its original topic – Intuition Amplifiers. There is a lot more to be said about them and I have not had a chance yet to dive into the meat of their algorithms. So, why don’t we do that?

Our brains are unbelievably complex biological computers. They are capable of processing our decisions, thoughts intuitions, feeling etc. This simple concept that our minds are products of our brains is probably a concept that most people do not find comforting - a concept that is not easily accepted by our brains. It’s alright though. Our brains were not designed to understand themselves. As I mentioned in my other posts it is impossible to fully comprehend our minds due to the Gödel’s incompleteness theorem and intuition’s self-contained psychological inaccessibility. Our brains were designed to acquire data from the external world through our sensory organs; to analyze, store, and process this information; and to generate outputs— actions and behaviors— that optimize our chances of survival. Understanding and accepting those premises allows us to establish some very common behavioral patterns that our brains use to accomplish their main function. In further posts I will focus on those patterns that were used to create Intuition Amplifiers.
 
Amplification of Associations

Here is a test to establish how much your brain relies on associations.

Read the following list of words and try to memorize them:
Bearish, Sell-Off, Meltdown, Panic, Plunge, Disaster, Capitulation, Fear, Anxiety, Ruin, Catastrophe, Collapse, Breakdown.

Now take a moment and try to recall without looking at those words whether the words “Down” and “Crash” were on the list.

The chances are you’d think that there were in the sequence.
The reason is obvious: “Down” and “Crash” are related to most of the words on the list.

Our tendency of confusing the perceptions that are closely associated with each other is not a fluke. It is one of the most stable behavioral patterns that we exhibit! Can we use it to make our predictions? Well, we can. It is one of our Intuition Amplifiers core algorithms.

Imagine that you are looking at 50 different price behavioral patterns using 50 different, but closely related time frames at the same time. Although we do not know what the majority of market participants are using right now to make their Buy/Sell decisions the chances are high enough that they are looking at least at one of those patterns right now. So, the association that you get by looking at all of them simultaneously should create a strong Intuition in you of what others might do next. This is one of the IA principles.

I will let you to think about it for a moment. It is not an easy concept to grasp, but it is a very powerful one! Of course I have simplified the example, but it does contain the whole notion.
 
Look at the picture below. Each bar on the histogram that we call “Sentiment Spectrum” represents Buying/Selling activity of the short-term traders in the ES market over 55 different time frames. The lengths of the bars represent the relative activity strength and the color represents the rate of change of those activities. Red palette of colors is for selling and blue palette for buying activities. Without going into details do you get the feeling (intuition) of where this security is heading now and what will most likely happen in the nearest future?
 

Attachments

Cornix posted this a while back on his blog and it helped me stop trying to predict what the majority of market participants were going to do next:

http://www.cornixtrading.com/2012/07/rats-vs-yale-students-randomness-psychology/

Over my 5 years of trading, I learned that my "feelings" were a thing best faded. Maybe after another 5 years, I'll be at the highest level of performance, trading at the intuitive level, as Mark Douglas calls it.

In the meantime, the most profitable psychological leap for me was to stop caring about what will happen next on any individual trade.

I look for two things to tell me whether to consider a trade: the setup and the R:R (based on stats I've compiled over thousands of appearances of the setups).

I then either place an order at the price that would signal to me a) something is more likely than not to happen, and when it happens the market offers a gain at least equal to the technically logical risk, or b) something has a 50/50 chance of happening, but when it happens the market offers 2 or more times the technically logical risk.

This is my personal trading plan, pure probabilities. Some of the setups that "feel" like slam dunks fail quickly and some of the setups "feel" impossible produce gains beyond my best expectations.

I was wearing myself out trying to predict what would happen next. I was the Yale student, certain that there was a way to perfect a system that was darn good enough if I could learn to embrace losses as a natural part of trading.

Kudos to those whose intuition helps them profit from the markets.

My intuition simply cannot be trusted at this point and so I have no desire to amplify it. :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top