Market theory - page 57
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
I don't understand you. Do you have a theory or are you just trying to create one?
If you have one, then publish it. Then we will begin to test it in practice and discuss it.
If the theory is not ready to be published, then what is the point of this whole topic? What do you want to discuss if there are no definitions, no laws, and no concepts of this theory?
By the way, how does your theory agree with Bohr's correspondence principle?
The Bohr correspondence principle (BCP) http://dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/enc_philosophy/7345/%D0%A1%D0%9E%D0%9E%D0%A2%D0%92%D0%95%D0%A2%D0%A1%D0%A2%D0%92%D0%98%D0%AF is strung not only with the proposed, scientific public, this theory of the market, but also with all my developments in various fields of science and technology, as, briefly, I cited here https://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/58256/page54, therefore, this theory, by definition, cannot fail to correspond to the BCP noticed earlier by Lobachevsky. Since the BVP is a necessary but not sufficient condition for the correspondence of the old and new theory, " Experience has the last and decisive word in establishing the truth of the theory. Experience , however, comes in a double form: as new experience which contradicts the old theory and as old experience in which the old theory is in agreement. Therefore the new, more general theory must be in accordance with the old theory under proper conditions . On the other hand, the new theory must satisfy all the data of the new experience.Thus the creation of a new theory is always a contradictory process, and in this sense S. P. is the manifestation of the law of negation of neg ation in the sphere of cognition. (from the reference above).
I, from the beginning of the topic, show and tell that the results of the theory completely coincide with the classical representation of profit, both in results and in the rigour of the mathematical apparatus describing profit (the so-called Kuznetsov's requirement of the correspondence of the mathematical apparatus). The correspondence of actual and calculated profit values is repeatedly shown by me in the form of screenshots, which clearly show the correspondence of actual (red dots) on the background of the blue calculated profit curve, e.g. herehttps://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/58256/page51, which shows that the sufficient correspondence condition - namely the confirmation by experience and practice of the new theory application - is met.
Based on the irrefutable facts and compliance with the PSB, I assert that, the new market theory is DONE. The task of my opponents is to disprove this claim, but I am not sure they will ever be able to do so.
Yusuf, thank you for being there!)
Thank you, Dimitri, for your feedback and in turn I would say that the motto you use, "Keep faith in yourself", is the best adapted to me in this situation. Thank you.
In fact, I'm not being facetious. Because there are very few people who try to create something new that hasn't existed before them. Few people use their brains to think (create) - that's how the brain works.
Yousufkhodja Sultonov:
thenew market theory is DONE.
Great!
The theory has been created.
I will wait for its description and the article.
No, I'm sure of what I said.
So let's assume we have a price at a certain level. Who moves it in which direction and by what means? I think the main "big" players are present in the market only through limit orders. Let's assume that the support level is 50 pips lower and the resistance line is 50 pips higher. Who stands at those levels? Who generates them? Resistance is formed by limit orders of sellers (bears). Support is formed by limit orders of buyers (bulls). So if you look at the question from this angle you are absolutely right! But if you look at the problem from a wider angle - here you can add stop orders of the opposite side and market orders. It's much more complicated than that... Well let's say a hapless bull trading market orders may be inherently a bear - when his stop order is triggered the price will be sent even lower ))
On reflection, I have come to the conclusion that you are right in a sense, Yusuf!
So let's assume we have a price at a certain level. Who moves it in which direction and by what means? I think the main "big" players are present in the market only through limit orders. Let's assume that the support level is 50 pips lower and the resistance line is 50 pips higher. Who stands at those levels? Who generates them? Resistance is formed by limit orders of sellers (bears). Support is formed by limit orders of buyers (bulls). So if you look at the question from this angle you are absolutely right! But if you look at the problem from a wider angle - here you can add stop orders of the opposite side and market orders. It's much more complicated than that... Well let's say a hapless bull that trades market orders may be inherently a bear - when his stop order triggers, the price will be sent even lower ))
It is advisable to leave the animals alone and try to express your reasoning in common terms:
- liquidity provider (limit orders in the Buy Limit / Sell Limit stack );
- Buyers (Buy Market);
- sellers (Sell Market);
- an order flow( Buy/Selltrade orders ):
a) imbalance towards buying;
b) an imbalance to the sell side;
c) Equality of flows.
It is advisable to leave the animals alone and try to express your reasoning in common terms:
- liquidity provider (limit orders in the Buy Limit / Sell Limit stack );
- Buyers (Buy Market);
- sellers (Sell Market);
- an order flow( Buy/Selltrade orders ):
a) imbalance towards buying;
b) an imbalance to the sell side;
c) Equality of flows.
It is advisable to leave the animals alone and try to express your reasoning in common terms:
- liquidity provider (limit orders in the Buy Limit / Sell Limit stack );
- Buyers (Buy Market);
- sellers (Sell Market);
- an order flow( Buy/Selltrade orders ):
a) imbalance towards buying;
b) an imbalance to the sell side;
c) Equality of streams.
Sustained. It would be unseemly to have such a zoo in an academic article. Academic economists and financiers can only laugh at that. Before you introduce new terms in the article, you should think carefully and use the existing terms as much as possible. In the meantime, don't distract Yusuf from his work. Let him finish his wording and prepare the article.
P.S. Yusuf, you have entered the terms normally at the beginning and from the name itself it was already clear what they were. For example: breakeven top level, breakeven bottom level, optimum price, current price, etc. And now you have to remember or decipher what each cliché means. Only bears and bulls can be left out of the beasts - they are common terms and do not raise any questions. You just need to understand them well and use them correctly.