Science, Meta-physics and Trading

dotslashfuture · Apr 7, 2003

as for quantum physics and metaphysics, yes there is interesting overlap there that has served to make me more spiritual, so I don't reject any of it out of hand.

what I DO reject is that science has got the universe all figured out. Throughout the ages pepole have thought they understood the world only to have thier whole paradigm turned upside down.

marketsurfer · Apr 7, 2003

dot,

i concur with much of what you state. can you point me to info regarding taleb never making a dime on his fund ? thanks !

best,

surfer

limitdown · Apr 7, 2003

Quote from wally_:

Well, I do have a Ph.D. in theoretical physics, which means that I have the best credentials you can ask for in this case, and yet I do not subscribe to your view that this subject should be discussed only among those with so-called credentials. These are fascinating things, that is as long as you are not closed-minded...

phuddy duddy, that's what I call my PhD.

sometimes we suffer from the syndrome of "who notices me?"

this is an excellent thread, however, the vast majority of those whom you're presumably trading/competing against aren't so well equippped, and hence make decisions on a vastly smaller turning radius than one as eloquent as you....

simplify, to the elemental Economic theorum that is effecting the markets and yuo'll succeed in your trading,,

to do otherwise would be a waist

wally_ · Apr 7, 2003

Quote from dotslashfuture:

what I DO reject is that science has got the universe all figured out. Throughout the ages pepole have thought they understood the world only to have thier whole paradigm turned upside down.

I think that scientists are getting increasingly humbler... yes, a few times they proclaimed the end of science, that is they believed there was nothing more to discover and what was left was only to apply the known laws of physics. There is still a strong belief among some scientists that the final complete theory of Nature is possible perhaps even in this century. I am not necessarily convinced about it. Yet, modern science has been around for only about 400 years and if you take this into account the progress it has made in that time has been truly astounding.

You may want to read the book that I suggested before in this thread, 'The Mind of God'. You will see that science does know its own limitations and that there is room and need for methaphysics too. Except that metaphysics cannot replace science and, as I said, vice versa.

wally_ · Apr 7, 2003

Quote from limitdown:

phuddy duddy, that's what I call my PhD.

sometimes we suffer from the syndrome of "who notices me?"

If someone suffers from this problem it is clearly you, not me. You had nothing else to add to this thread than to note that I had mentioned that I have a Ph.D. in physics. A few other folks said they had Ph.D.s in mathematics. I see nothing wrong about it and except you apparently no-one else does. So perhaps you tell me why it is inappropriate to mention this, particularly that it was clearly in the right thread and in the right context. Actually, you don't have to answer this question, it is a rhetorical one.

Dragn · Apr 7, 2003

Quote from wally_:

I think that scientists are getting increasingly humbler...

I agree. I think the more they understand the more humble they become.

It seems like this happens with trading too. The more you understand about trading you get more humble.

Well.....Not about science but just my thought......

Dragn

DT-waw · Apr 8, 2003

Quote from marketsurfer:

i believe that one day markets will be predictable. when this occurs, it's time for the next paradigm.

Please explain, 100% predictable? Hmmm...
Markets are predictable to some degree now, but fully predictable - that's impossible IMO.

I think we shouldn't look at trading as a separate thing (science, physics and trading). Trading is closely connected with psychology, math, statistics, economy. It belongs to our reality. Chaos theory, quantum physics, math, taoism they're all trying to explain, understand the whole reality, which means - including trading. Taoism is a general concept, while physics and chaos theory want to explain details, more precisely. At least that's the way I view it.

limitdown · Apr 8, 2003

Quote from wally_:

If someone suffers from this problem it is clearly you, not me. You had nothing else to add to this thread than to note that I had mentioned that I have a Ph.D. in physics. A few other folks said they had Ph.D.s in mathematics. I see nothing wrong about it and except you apparently no-one else does. So perhaps you tell me why it is inappropriate to mention this, particularly that it was clearly in the right thread and in the right context. Actually, you don't have to answer this question, it is a rhetorical one.

you probably won't re-read my entire statement, I did. Its in context, as well as this thread.

Glad to see others identify themselves in their academic accomplishments.

What I added to this thread was a return to the focus of trading, and the fact that most of us participants don't mind indulging in other discussions, as long as we can draw the direct inference between the discussion, relevant market dynamics and current trading theorum. To do otherwise is an academic exercise, best reserved to bending elbows over beer. To be offended with this direct statement seperates our two focus(S) towards relevance.

Frankly, I have bored others and a few wise individuals who caught me 'drift, with long winded verbiage that expressed complex multi disciplinary thought as it reflected on current trading and economic trends. Many times the underlying discussions were initially taken as offensive until the relevance was made clear through further discussion. As a result, we were collectively able to focus our energies back on these boring trading times.

Now that things have perked up, as a result of the direct hostilities in Iraq, those times of doldrums have changed to vibrant short lived market activity.

I know that I participate in these threads solely for what I can get out of them, not for academic exercise or showcasing my degrees.

Trade long and prosper!

marketsurfer · Apr 8, 2003

Quote from DT-waw:

Please explain, 100% predictable? Hmmm...
Markets are predictable to some degree now, but fully predictable - that's impossible IMO.

I think we shouldn't look at trading as a separate thing (science, physics and trading). Trading is closely connected with psychology, math, statistics, economy. It belongs to our reality. Chaos theory, quantum physics, math, taoism they're all trying to explain, understand the whole reality, which means - including trading. Taoism is a general concept, while physics and chaos theory want to explain details, more precisely. At least that's the way I view it.

yes, 100% predicticable is impossible, for now. i believe one day when the root cause of human emotion is understood and quantified completely, markets (as we know them) will be 100% predictable hence cease to exist in their current form.

taoism, chaos, qauntum physics provide a filter thru which to view the reality of market analysis, nothing more. trading is something one DOES, analysis is something one THINKS/ CREATES.

best,

surfer

DT-waw · Apr 8, 2003

Quote from marketsurfer:

yes, 100% predicticable is impossible, for now. i believe one day when the root cause of human emotion is understood and quantified completely, markets (as we know them) will be 100% predictable hence cease to exist in their current form.

I disagree. Are you talking about financial markets only? Maybe all markets will be fully predictable? Perhaps you'll be able to predict your life! That would be so boooring, worst thing can ever happen!