It is interesting to me, but psychology in markets is similar to the way we describe mass in physics through the Higgs boson. That is, mass (as we undertand it from a Higgs perspective) is a field interacting with itself. It is telling you how much energy you need to spend to drag an excitation out of the background field.
I don't currently have a "mass" term in the model (momentum is the closest thing that would describe mass psychology) because I don't like (a way of saying I don't have a clear picture) pure mathematical ways of measuring it. Consensus is a better estimator, and I do have those, but they seem to lag. In fact, I can "feel" it better than I can describe it.
The clear signs that "a higher energy to drag an excitation out of the background field" is required in a low psychology environment. Thing is, you would think that low volatility would dominate in this regime.
Anyway, free-form thinking here.
I don't currently have a "mass" term in the model (momentum is the closest thing that would describe mass psychology) because I don't like (a way of saying I don't have a clear picture) pure mathematical ways of measuring it. Consensus is a better estimator, and I do have those, but they seem to lag. In fact, I can "feel" it better than I can describe it.
The clear signs that "a higher energy to drag an excitation out of the background field" is required in a low psychology environment. Thing is, you would think that low volatility would dominate in this regime.
Anyway, free-form thinking here.