Quote from konviction:
Quote from 1a2b3cppp:
no explanation other than "it only makes sense that since nature follows specific laws the same laws should be appliacble to price movements."
and why is this so illogical?
Because you're taking something that is definitely
outside the realm of financial markets and trying to apply it to the financial markets.
It's exactly as illogical as applying something like the progression of Tennis Scores, which are definitely
outside the realm of financial markets, (0 (love), 15, 30, 40) and trying to apply that to the financial markets.
Or taking a progression of prime numbers, which are definitely
outside the realm of financial markets, and trying to apply that to the financial markets.
Or taking [anything] that is
outside the realm of the financial markets and trying to apply it to the financial markets.
Is the fibonacci sequence a "real thing?" Yes, absolutely. That wiki article explains it.
But is completely
outside the realm of trading and that is why it makes as much sense to apply it to trading as it does to apply Tennis scores or prime numbers or anything else.
I'm not sure how else I can explain it.
I mean think about it. You're saying that a ratio of numbers (that may or may not even be found in nature) are somehow appliacble to psychology. That's a collosal stretch.
Ratio of things in nature != psychology. That's as absurd as saying the number of pellets in a bag of dog food can predict basketball scores.
If a large enough group of people believe that they work, then yes, as stupid as you keep flaming that it is, then its going to work regardless.
A large enough group of people = noob traders. Although I cannot confirm it, I seriously doubt that hedge fund managers or pro traders use fibs.
Why do people buy homes they cant afford?..its illogical, but MILLIONS of people have done it..and they will continue to do it..if they know they cant afford it, but buy it anyway, then they will be foreclosed ....
Now you're comparing entirely unrelated things.
Pointing out one illogical behavior does not prove another.
You're trying to say that "people buy homes they can't afford. That is illogical. Therefore, fibonaccis must also work because that is also illogical."
You'd fail Intro to Logic 101 with that argument.
I can tell you're trying to emotionally rationalize rather than logically rationalize, which at least suggests that you are
passionate about trading, and that's a good thing. But emotional traders lose money and emotional arguers lose arguments.
same thing in the market... there is a large enough group that believe they work, and therefor the theory holds up... it doesnt have to make sense
Read this page and see if you can identify the fallacy in your argument. Hint: I just described it in the previous section.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies
"the market can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent"
Ever hear that quote.
Yes, but it's not relevant to what you're talking about.