I think he wanted to know if it's possible to obtain a 1% earning per day in the long term, and how to, if there's any method/strategy.
Question for some math gurus
- Thread starter dafishman
- Start date
I think he wanted to know if it's possible to obtain a 1% earning per day in the long term, and how to, if there's any method/strategy.
Oh boy... talk about logically fallacies. Consider this:
(1) Knowing math is necessary to good trading.
(2) Knowing math is not sufficient to good trading.
If this is true, then not all scientists can be good traders. However, you can't be a good trader without knowing math. See how your "otherwise" is rather... wrong?
The lack of basic skill set on this board, from both the OP and this chugger, is astonishing.
(1) Knowing math is necessary to good trading.
(2) Knowing math is not sufficient to good trading.
If this is true, then not all scientists can be good traders. However, you can't be a good trader without knowing math. See how your "otherwise" is rather... wrong?
The lack of basic skill set on this board, from both the OP and this chugger, is astonishing.
Calculate numbers is not math, topology IS, and math is too hard for majority of us. I tried to encourage him staying focus on his dream. It's not necessary to learn MATH to handle trading technique, and it's a waste of time. He just need wikipedia to be aware of the function of formula and the computer will process the data for him.
Usually, I do not talk about logic when I am trading the market full of uncertainty.
Point taken on not over confusing this poor fella. I can certainly understand your point that knowing topology isn't directly related to trading (although I won't say that it has no effect whatsoever; a little number theory and optimization goes a long way to being a more enriched thinker).
But then you lost me on this statement. Why does being logically and uncertainty preclude each other? There's a huge volume of math devoted to uncertainty. Broadly, many engineering systems require stochastic controls. Now, the market, being nonstationary, is a different beast in a lot of ways. But I do take issue that you can't talk about logic while facing uncertainty.
But then you lost me on this statement. Why does being logically and uncertainty preclude each other? There's a huge volume of math devoted to uncertainty. Broadly, many engineering systems require stochastic controls. Now, the market, being nonstationary, is a different beast in a lot of ways. But I do take issue that you can't talk about logic while facing uncertainty.
It looks like what becomes apparent is that the logic is based on two variables and that they have a specific hypothesis set gorening them. Two mutually exclusive hypotheses.
Everyone knows that any paradigm or algorithm is based upon two things: a hypothesis set and it's parametric measure.
The parametric measure is shown and it is simple to see (visually). It is velocity and the velocity is measured by the tipped aspect of the boundary lines of the two variables about which the two hypotheses are stated.
Any person can decide through a succession of decisions to come to the place I am describing to extract the offer of the market to the extent desired.
Why didn't nav or sj do this and do something else instead?
usually the ansr is that they have backgrounds that prevent them from thinking critically. So far they have proved that.
Would they or each of them be able to work together to learn to make this con of money shown on the four charts? Would they make a trading plan and a business plan to follow through?
My hypothesis is yes for each question. And they do have to put in front of their present mental first recourse, what they learn in the future to make it possible to overcome their poor past. Can they surmount building such a boundary around their past decisions and the associated consequences? My hypothesis is yes, again.
By using each chart I posted and its associated level of trading skill, they can construct a family of ccurves (semilog, please) that show the postage stamp curves by starting with one contract and going to 50 contracts and just adding profits after that for a quarter of a year. That is a about a seventh grade task where the compound interest formula is taught. Use a margin of 4,000 dollars and start with one contract. We already proved C is unimportant and the i's you each use are not any good either.
---------------------------------------------------
If this guy ain't jack hershey then he's a clone.
Everyone knows that any paradigm or algorithm is based upon two things: a hypothesis set and it's parametric measure.
The parametric measure is shown and it is simple to see (visually). It is velocity and the velocity is measured by the tipped aspect of the boundary lines of the two variables about which the two hypotheses are stated.
Any person can decide through a succession of decisions to come to the place I am describing to extract the offer of the market to the extent desired.
Why didn't nav or sj do this and do something else instead?
usually the ansr is that they have backgrounds that prevent them from thinking critically. So far they have proved that.
Would they or each of them be able to work together to learn to make this con of money shown on the four charts? Would they make a trading plan and a business plan to follow through?
My hypothesis is yes for each question. And they do have to put in front of their present mental first recourse, what they learn in the future to make it possible to overcome their poor past. Can they surmount building such a boundary around their past decisions and the associated consequences? My hypothesis is yes, again.
By using each chart I posted and its associated level of trading skill, they can construct a family of ccurves (semilog, please) that show the postage stamp curves by starting with one contract and going to 50 contracts and just adding profits after that for a quarter of a year. That is a about a seventh grade task where the compound interest formula is taught. Use a margin of 4,000 dollars and start with one contract. We already proved C is unimportant and the i's you each use are not any good either.
---------------------------------------------------
If this guy ain't jack hershey then he's a clone.
I hate that this criticism is leveled on us quants -- not being able to multiply. Anyone born after 1975 used a calculator in middle/high school. Even our SAT was on a calculator. I don't know why they haven't changed the GRE, but...
Point is, we grew up on calculators. Sure, I can do it by hand, but I choose not to do it by hand because the TI-89 was invented and the theoretical basis for multiplication is well understood.
It's a real issue in math departments today -- no one does anything correctly without rereading, retesting, proof reading, code reviews, etc.
Ah well, I digress.
Seriously.
You must be talking about me. I use my cellphone to calculate how much to tip the waitress... And I'm not a Quant....
Not to mention, I'm usually drunk by the time I leave the restaurant.
My point is... don't drink and drive... (I think...) Did I miss anything???