Quote from hypostomus:
Well, since you are an information theorist, and just to keep the banter going, those of us who haven't quite convinced ourselves that the market is all signal, and may just be a mite noisy, like to think that various estimation and decision theories might have some value, like Kalman filtering. So I run filters on price and volume. A mere superstition, no doubt. Just as I am prone to mistake noise for signal, I am also prone to miss signal in noise.
Quote from KS96:
When are people going to understand
that all those indicators are derivatives of price
and actually provide *less* information than the price itself?
And they have absolutely no forcasting value whatsoever...
Quote from Pekelo:
So far 1 signal, 20 points gain with the YM. Nice....

Quote from hypostomus:
ST, understanding Kalman filtering gives one a unique understanding of the mathematical nature of indicators.
IF:
the signal in price could be described by a physical model,
the noise in price could be described statistically,
and the noise in the measurement of price could be described statistically,
THEN one could create a multi-dimensional filter which would estimate the future value of the signal component of price to the greatest theoretically possible accuracy.
A corollary to the theory of Kalman filtering is that EVERY mathematical operation (like an ma) on a time series (like price) is an ideal Kalman filter for some potentially infinite number of combinations of the above three conditions. The sad part of indicator invention is that the people who do this don't realize that. Every indicator is a perfect solution to an unknown problem.