The Delta Phenomenon. (any Opinions About It?)

Delta phenomenon is based on the moon but I never read their book yet.

Many futures traders believe in "Moon theory" especially elliotists and of course ganntist. Others will be afraid to admit it since this is of course mystical.

This page at http://www.kingcambo.com/moon/ is interesting because it gives an idea of the statistics. When I will have time I will study the statistics. But if the rate is as high as this page pretends then statistically it is significant that is to say there is a good chance that it is not by pure random.

In THAT case (which is still to be proven as I said by statistical tests) there can be three great hypothesis:

1- the moon or God feels interests with market :D
2- moon influences the traders
3- market is manipulated with an algorithm correlated with the moon by human beings and hide this behind the second hypothesis.

Among traders who believe in moon hypothesis 2 is generally supposed. Now let's take the Ocam razor method used in Science to exclude some hypothesis: that is to say what is the hypothesis that supposed the most simple explanation ?

Hypothesis 1 is excluded immediatly because supposing that God have interest in the moon first suppose that he exists and that he follows the market everyday :D

Hypothesis 2 could be true macroscopically (but it supposed that the impact of the moon is really strong on human which is far from being proved) but even in that case microscopilly in details there are many things wrong. As for my equations show during globex session there is no mass psychology at all but the market follow the same pattern. On Globex there is above market makers robots.

After excluding 1 and 2 only stays 3 :p . Hypothese 4 would be a mix between 2 and 3.

Now all hypothesis are based on the proof that statistics about the moon are significant enough. This is not proved yet but it is much more easy to do so with market quotes than with human characters. So I will do it one day just by curiosity.





Quote from Aranha:

Dear All,

does anybody know anything about this? They say they can predict the market moves in advance...

http://www.deltasociety.com

If so, what's your opinion about it?

Regards

Aranha
More...
 
search and ye will find, anyway it look like the ewave thing i.e. work for some and not for another (beware of 'inversion' code word when system f*ck up).

----------
Howdy Scott,

Delta is not a trading system, but a non-standard cyclical tracking
device that seeks to predict turning points in price direction. I am
not a member of Delta Society, but I use my own delta solutions to track
stocks and commodities. It is fascinating, addictive, and relatively
easy to do.

Nearly everyone uses one or more of Wilder's older indicators--like
ADX--but few give much credance to Delta. The basic premise of the
theory is that markets respond in repetitive patterns correspondant to
time space relationships of the earth, moon, and sun. Even if it works,
it could be that it is just too uncomfortable to admit that men all tend
to want to howl at the moon at the same times.

Does it work? It appears to be uncanny how accurate it is most of the
time, but I'm not rich yet. At least one user of this group uses delta
along with Dynamic Gann to track markets. I'm not yet familiar with
Dynamic Gann, but it appears to be a method to predict amplitude of
price movement--something delta does not do. Other users of this group
could help you more with that.

Will Rogers predicts that tomorrow the market will go up...or down.
Maybe that's all delta really does. There is something in delta called
an inversion that can happen each set of cycles. Maybe it is for real
or maybe it just allows us to backfit patterns to suit our own purposes.
You'll have to be the judge of that. Right now, the moon just broke
through a part in the curtains and I feel a primal urge to go out and
clear my lungs.

Happy howling,
Randy
 
Are any of these adherents making any money, other than the $$ selling to true believers?

I suspect a dude like Prechter would be on welfare if not for selling books and newsletters.

Than again, Abbey Cohen is no bargain either.
 
Really :D As I said there is a 3rd and more rational explanation than that: market is just manipulated by human beings who hide their manipulation through esoterism like Hitler used to say that he uses esoteric symbology to fool the people !

So yes It can work but not for the cause people believe in at first. A scientific approach means that details of a theory are examined and when you look at details like Globex session paradox appear. Hell is in details. If you overlook details it just mean that you want to overlook reality and believe in goships.

30% of the volume on NYSE comes from automatic trading of brokerages firms. The nobel prize Maurice Allais affirm that thanks to real time Market can be manipulated technically very easily - more easily than if it was just a fixing once a day (he doesn't say that it is he says that it CAN but when interests is so huge ....): you don't have to get a nobel prize to understand why: just look how supermarket control the flow of clients they divide them between as many cash registers as needed. real time is a technical mean of division. And as I said in my post, my model equations show that volume has no impact on key price levels which make the traders react - of course volume are significant statistically for judging the market but this is not I am talking about.

Quote from nkhoi:



Even if it works,
it could be that it is just too uncomfortable to admit that men all tend
to want to howl at the moon at the same times.
More...
 
Great you are not a believer : that's what I need. Can you compulse statistical datas for me please so that I can make a statistical test to prove or disprove this thing :D

Quote from stock777:

Are any of these adherents making any money, other than the $$ selling to true believers?

I suspect a dude like Prechter would be on welfare if not for selling books and newsletters.

Than again, Abbey Cohen is no bargain either.
More...
 
Harry,

it's so nice to see a happy man on this board. I mean, you smile a lot, so you must be happy.

I am hoping to get your point one of these fine days... however as a scientist I am not buying your use of Occam's razor principle.

Your hypothesis 2 is the simplest one, hypothesis 3 is not as simple as 2 and in fact is a clear violation of Occam's razor principle because you invent one more element (the hypothetical 'algorithm') to explain the cyclical martket behavior. This is not necessary, in fact, it makes it sound like a conspiracy theory and not a scientific explanation: traders conspiring to manipulate the market in such a way as to blame it on the Moon.

Why not just blame it on the Moon.

Women's menstruation cycle is about the same in length as the Moon phase cycle. Using your hypothesis 3, you would say that women conspire to have such cycles in order to blame it on the Moon, right? Now, is it not just simpler to say that apparently it is the Moon that has something to do with that instead of making one more assumption about the conspiration between the women and the Moon?

I mean, where do you get ideas like that from? :D
 
Quote from Aranha:

Dear All,

does anybody know anything about this? They say they can predict the market moves in advance...

http://www.deltasociety.com

If so, what's your opinion about it?

Regards

Aranha
More...

The Ulitimate scam. This is exactly what P. T. Barnum had in mind when he said there was sucker born every minute.
 
hypothesis 2 is just based on human interests and HUMAN INTERESTS HAS ALWAYS BEEN CONSIDERED AS RATIONAL don't you ever heard of Game theories huh ? As for Moon influence sorry but the NUMBER OF CAUSALITY CHAINS IS SO HUGE that it sure violates Ocam Razor. Simple doesn't mean SIMPLEST : simple mean how many hypothesis you have to suppose to achieve the whole CAUSALITY CHAIN. In hypothesis 2 you have to suppose human interests of a group of persons that's all. Then the algorithm is just a mean (it could be something else) and as I said in another post Nobel Prize Maurice Allais even said that Real Time Market should be forbidden because this can be the cause of Collusion and Manipulation of Market Makers. As for Collusion of them there have been trials at justice that in some cases proved it clearly. So having decomposed hypothesis into sub-hypothesis it appears that this is possible. As to come back to Maurice Allais NOT WHOLE market makers are needed to collude, in fact a single market maker with enough money power can do the job. And money power come just from Credit. And if you have the power to accord credit to yourself ... that is the source of power for centuries and centuries I don't learn anything I hope.

So this is not based on irrationality like the moon influence on men: if so it would be a long time astrology would be accepted by scientists hahaha !

As a conclusion before going to the moon just look on earth before the distance is shorter for reaching Ocam Razor :D


P.S.: 30% of the volume of the NYSE come from automated trading system of brokerage. They are responsable for the volatility during the 30 first minutes. If you take hypothesis 2 sorry but how can explain the influence of Moon in that case huh (supposing that there is an influence of course) :D

Quote from wally_:

Harry,

it's so nice to see a happy man on this board. I mean, you smile a lot, so you must be happy.

I am hoping to get your point one of these fine days... however as a scientist I am not buying your use of Occam's razor principle.

Your hypothesis 2 is the simplest one, hypothesis 3 is not as simple as 2 and in fact is a clear violation of Occam's razor principle because you invent one more element (the hypothetical 'algorithm') to explain the cyclical martket behavior. This is not necessary, in fact, it makes it sound like a conspiracy theory and not a scientific explanation: traders conspiring to manipulate the market in such a way as to blame it on the Moon.

Why not just blame it on the Moon.

Women's menstruation cycle is about the same in length as the Moon phase cycle. Using your hypothesis 3, you would say that women conspire to have such cycles in order to blame it on the Moon, right? Now, is it not just simpler to say that apparently it is the Moon that has something to do with that instead of making one more assumption about the conspiration between the women and the Moon?

I mean, where do you get ideas like that from? :D
More...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top