--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote from jack hershey:
the volume 8 cases are:
P1, T1, P2, T2P, T2F, NOT T2P, NOT T2P, and P3F
I see 7 here. Could you describe briefly what each of them means?
P stands for peak. T stands for trough.
1 stands for first. 2 stands for second.
A third letter P is Pass (True) and a third letter F is False (Fail)
It looks like I did my usual typo. The one that appears twice is actually what you expect. Change one of the T2P's to T2F.
All of these pieces become the parts of The Pattern". Please post the sketch or the drafted version.
Written out the Order Of Events becomes: Peak 1, Trough 1, peak 2, Trough 2 pass, trough 2 Fail, NOT trough 2 Pass, NOT trough 2 Fail. and Peak 3 Fail.
In logic, there are expressions and operators. A true expression has no modifier. When an expression is the opposite, then a modifier is used. The modifier conventionally chosen is "NOT". If logic circuitry is in use by and electrical engineer and an expression of the "NOT nature is needed, the engineer inserts an inverter, An inverter takes a regular input an makes it the opposite.
For volume cases, do you compare a volume bar to its prior volume bar?
I keep mentioning an approach which I type as RDBMS. SQL and Haskell are such. The APL was developed using two 360's back to back at UCSC; IBM ran an APL operation within UCSC in Philadelphia. Wharton was prt of Penn and Penn ws one of the 26 members of the UCSC consortium. I ran two divisions there at UCSC at that time. So I got to stick my head in once and a while.
My background is as a free floating Problem Solver in the design of large computers their hardware and their philosophy. For what ever reason it was discovered I could look at "D" size logic flow, commit it to memory immediately and then metally trouble shoot ant logis schema relative to its strategic implementation range of applications.
Rather than talk to designers and developers it was determined I would present packaged solutions to them and they would go about learning what I did as a fix. I was vry youthful looking and as a consequence it was difficult to face off with a person who made some E or O.
What are your criterion?
I wrote out in cells of 22 tables all the math for SQL. Later I converted all this stuff to another platform. I am typing out this conversion so a library become in existance. The criteria is shown in "The Pattern" implicitely.
I can't say that I have a pt 1 on this price bar and thus the volume bar case associated with this price bar is P1.
It is crucial to become knowledgeable about the Order Of Events of variables. I feel that if a person knows this, then he has an advantage. So far, I have used this matter to differentiate people. Also I have been taught to not care about other people. If a person is reasonable enough, he can "get it". the record is clear about those who do and those who don't.
Your statement above cannot be made nor used for anything.
It is true that during a bar for price and during its corresponding bar for volume, that "The Pattern" occurs as drawn or sketched. In the Scientific Method's use a deduction can be drawn. All I did ws go through a system and complete it in terms of all its parts, all the connecting operators and all the subsystems of relationships within the egis of a RDBMS.
By doing so, I would be wrongfully adding price as a leading factor in defining volume cases. Right?
You are correct that you would be making a mistake. It is vey important to learn how to determine you are making a mistake. Secondly it is very important to determine what the replacement is for refraining from making a mistake.
Fortunately all the theory of various approaches have been proven systematically in the various fields and disciplines. there is no new ground to cover in market theory. It is easily possible to critique each of the mistken approaches that sre presently not performing to any extent.
Quote from jack hershey:
the volume 8 cases are:
P1, T1, P2, T2P, T2F, NOT T2P, NOT T2P, and P3F
I see 7 here. Could you describe briefly what each of them means?
P stands for peak. T stands for trough.
1 stands for first. 2 stands for second.
A third letter P is Pass (True) and a third letter F is False (Fail)
It looks like I did my usual typo. The one that appears twice is actually what you expect. Change one of the T2P's to T2F.
All of these pieces become the parts of The Pattern". Please post the sketch or the drafted version.
Written out the Order Of Events becomes: Peak 1, Trough 1, peak 2, Trough 2 pass, trough 2 Fail, NOT trough 2 Pass, NOT trough 2 Fail. and Peak 3 Fail.
In logic, there are expressions and operators. A true expression has no modifier. When an expression is the opposite, then a modifier is used. The modifier conventionally chosen is "NOT". If logic circuitry is in use by and electrical engineer and an expression of the "NOT nature is needed, the engineer inserts an inverter, An inverter takes a regular input an makes it the opposite.
For volume cases, do you compare a volume bar to its prior volume bar?
I keep mentioning an approach which I type as RDBMS. SQL and Haskell are such. The APL was developed using two 360's back to back at UCSC; IBM ran an APL operation within UCSC in Philadelphia. Wharton was prt of Penn and Penn ws one of the 26 members of the UCSC consortium. I ran two divisions there at UCSC at that time. So I got to stick my head in once and a while.
My background is as a free floating Problem Solver in the design of large computers their hardware and their philosophy. For what ever reason it was discovered I could look at "D" size logic flow, commit it to memory immediately and then metally trouble shoot ant logis schema relative to its strategic implementation range of applications.
Rather than talk to designers and developers it was determined I would present packaged solutions to them and they would go about learning what I did as a fix. I was vry youthful looking and as a consequence it was difficult to face off with a person who made some E or O.
What are your criterion?
I wrote out in cells of 22 tables all the math for SQL. Later I converted all this stuff to another platform. I am typing out this conversion so a library become in existance. The criteria is shown in "The Pattern" implicitely.
I can't say that I have a pt 1 on this price bar and thus the volume bar case associated with this price bar is P1.
It is crucial to become knowledgeable about the Order Of Events of variables. I feel that if a person knows this, then he has an advantage. So far, I have used this matter to differentiate people. Also I have been taught to not care about other people. If a person is reasonable enough, he can "get it". the record is clear about those who do and those who don't.
Your statement above cannot be made nor used for anything.
It is true that during a bar for price and during its corresponding bar for volume, that "The Pattern" occurs as drawn or sketched. In the Scientific Method's use a deduction can be drawn. All I did ws go through a system and complete it in terms of all its parts, all the connecting operators and all the subsystems of relationships within the egis of a RDBMS.
By doing so, I would be wrongfully adding price as a leading factor in defining volume cases. Right?
You are correct that you would be making a mistake. It is vey important to learn how to determine you are making a mistake. Secondly it is very important to determine what the replacement is for refraining from making a mistake.
Fortunately all the theory of various approaches have been proven systematically in the various fields and disciplines. there is no new ground to cover in market theory. It is easily possible to critique each of the mistken approaches that sre presently not performing to any extent.
