Quote from ocean5:
I`d rather have ONE display that will zoom-in/zoom-out after the volume pace changes,but have no idea how to accomplish that.
Kinda DCS range system
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributed_control_system
Quote from ocean5:
I`d rather have ONE display that will zoom-in/zoom-out after the volume pace changes,but have no idea how to accomplish that.
Quote from jack hershey:
With respect to trading using DCS and the other more appropriate control systems is duck soup.
The arrangement is to keep records.
In MADA, the most important money making records are the D and second A records.
This explains why OODA doesn't work very well and it explains why most potential traders are going to fail.
One person commented today, and incorrectly, that information loses its utility as time passes.
Naturally any record keeping has the appropriate reset faculty. Reset occurs only at the appropriate time for cleaning the slate (at the trend's failure point).
Maybe wikipedia level thinking can explain RDBMS.
Any MS is a record keeping function.
In SQL it requires 24 tables to take the market's full offer. Some tables are a day long so have 81 rows. Most are 6 x 6's.
There is no functioning speed requirement since all trading is carving turns using OTR arranged information.
To exercise systemmic controls, fields in tables are used.
As a trend continues, the fields related to the trend are completed. That is, they are emptied upon a reset and compiled as the trade goes through its Order Of Events. OOE is not used by CW. There is no RDB in CW.
In SQL this is done by language instructions.
The instructions locate the table and its pertinent field. This field is then "filled in" by two things:
1. aquiring information from historical data or realtime streaming data.
2. performing operations on the data.
Step 2 increases the degrees of freedom of information and completes analysis in a timely manner. Hence the small and specialized tables.
All of this framework is figured out just once and you figure out EVERYTHING.
I spent two days typing the tables. They each have unique names.
A lot of tables have algebra in their fields. This algebra provides the language (SQL, for example) with operating and analysis information.
The system operates ONLY when there is change in the information. This means the system is event based.
Intradaybill has explained that he thinks the information decays over time and records are not useful to him or those who think like him (jcl, for example). the counter to his incorrect reasoning is this. It is explained in Behavioral Finance. Also the market has finite sized variables (granularity). Typical variable names are instrument's prices and contracts. All of these ingredients build into many kinds of systems and strategies (see pg 199 of Harris) Markets become huge repositories of capital. Markets flow amd the flow is noiseless, and free of anomalies and flaws. The test of this is the system's finite characteristics (granularity) which cover EVERYTHING. Use set theory.
As in the DCS wikipedia level information, a person setting up the ATS for trading, has to know how the system operates. In this thread before this post, how the system operates is an unknowable entity.
As may be seen the two sources of data which are NOT continuous but have a limited smallest size (granularity), form asymptotically around records content and with streaming data at a capacity of variable flow.
Using RDB means the cases are narrowed greatly to 10 then to 2 for price. There are more cases for volume but they reduce to 2 cases. You are familiar with what a common name is for a 2 by 2 display involving P and V. The cells are completely defined.
The 24 tables work as a system where the market controls the trader who is just making money by following the tabular output.
This is where the OOE's come in. They were mathematically deduced. A finite set of pieces resulted. These pieces fit together.
Making money comes down to holding while the market stays in its container. The trade is at the beginning of the overlap of containers. The key deduction involved was figuring out there had to be overlap. The failure of a trend is what ends the trend.
The topic "Strange Attractors" is a dead end. How elements of a system that is not continuous, functionally speaking, (granular) can be combined using quantum principles is also a dead end.
The only clean and simple path is obscured completely by the CW which uses a bunch of dead ends. It is the neatest thing that could have happened since sliced bread.
The clean and simple path is totally obscured by CW type thinking.
Quote from jack hershey:
The failure of a trend is what ends the trend.
The clean and simple path is totally obscured by CW type thinking.
Quote from Jason Edwards:
This is a cleaner spot.![]()
Don't you just love Jack!?Quote from jack hershey:
The topic "Strange Attractors" is a dead end. How elements of a system that is not continuous, functionally speaking, (granular) can be combined using quantum principles is also a dead end.
Quote from Albert Cibiades:
Jack, even Wordle couldn't make any sense out this garbage. So I felt a lot better that I couldn't either.