Technical Analysis Logical Flaws

Quote from dbphoenix:

It has nothing to do with lines, straight or otherwise, but rather with an understanding of the nature of supply and demand.

As to the "principle" behind technical analysis, what might that be?

The market is systemmatic.

And while one might argue that few have what it takes to make the leap to scientific analysis, one might also argue that many have been there done that and don't see the point, particularly when they've been analyzing for years and still can't tell the difference between up and down.

There is no diffierence beween up or down. the system of operation of the market is cyclic. Both types of trends continue when price moves TOWARDS the Right Trend Line. A trends end when the price fails to reach the left trendline.(/color]

As to secrecy, of course. In fact there's more secrecy cloaking the process and results of all this scientific analysis than there is the alleged cover-up of alien visitations.

My viewpoint (opinion) is different than yours. Most "scientific research" gets off on the wrong foot. I feel this is very evident by virtue of most making an effort to noe differentiate or know the variable roles (scientifically speaking). Most "scientific research" fails from day one onward because price is treated scientifically as the "independent variable" when in fact, It is the dependent variable. Most often, those in orderly discussions do not know to begin with the independent variable of the markets.

Thus, "scientific research" is not done on the system of operation of markets. If you look at the NSF grant awards, you can easily notice that the CV's of the award winners show that not much "science" is involved on any front.


Yet for all those who claim to know but don't say, they sure do post a lot.

I agre that discussing logical failures is not a common topic of discussion. There is little scientific gain in discussing what isn't "good science".
More...
 
Quote from ammo:

Technical Analysis Logical Flaws
there are no flaws in ta its just like a reciept they hand you at the checkout, a list of what was bought, the price and tota
l...it's the logic applied to it
More...

Most of what you personally know of as "TA" is riddled with logical flaws.

It is my view that you will never find out the true contexts, situations and circumstances within which you operate and believe.

What I suggest is true for you is also true for most people who relate in any way to the system of operation of markets.

I would say that most people cannot "start over" to learn correctly. This is the major failure of the financial industry.

Those who do use the Scientific Method to have a complete solution to the system of operation of markets, in many ways see how nice it is that the vaste majority of those interested cannot figure out what is going on.

Some of the comments in this thread suggest that "something is rotten in Denmark". Emotions of CW type non-thinkers exemplify common emotional states of those who do not know. Fear, anxiety and anger are commonest traits in ET as is well known.

This upset majority actually have named their quest in terms that a familiar in a religious sense. It is not that makingg money is a religion; but it is true that the quest to make money has taken on a religious character rather than an intellectual character.
 
Quote from kut2k2:

When you post inside the quote of another poster, you make it extremely difficult to respond. Perhaps that was the point.

I am a person who does this. I had not recognised this aspect of posting before. For me, I notice that when responding to anyone, some of the post dissappears. Maybe you will discover this.

In any event, the ACD thread is very popular. If nobody there is making money, one has to wonder what the attraction there is.

A lot of people have no interest simply because of the stated "foundation" of ACD. those that participate, have a beliefs system that is most common among traders.
More...
 
Quote from DR.BOUYE:

Definitive technical analysis? Does it exist beyond the outlier?
More...



Yes and no.

The outlier has two sides; both are "beyond" the zone of the outlier. Not surprisingly, you are looking in the wrong direction.

It is a parallel problem to the Reagan/Laffler problem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top