Impulse - page 9

New comment
 
Олег avtomat:

No, it's not.

speed ~~ first difference

acceleration ~~ second difference

I wrote about dimensionality - what to measure in, not HOW to measure. If accepted, further writes how to count speed and how to count acceleration.
 
Karputov Vladimir:
I wrote about dimensionality - what to measure in, not HOW to measure. If it's accepted, then go on to write how to count speed and how to count acceleration.
Well, if it's dimensional, then yes. But the unit of time can be minutes, hours, days --- it all depends on the scale.
 
Олег avtomat:
But the unit of time can be minutes, hours or days --- it all depends on the scale.
For now, I propose to investigate (catch) acceleration and throw (not momentum) on ticks, timeframe is not important. That is, let the dimensionality remain in pips/ms.
 
Karputov Vladimir:
For now, I propose to investigate (catch) acceleration and throw (not momentum) on ticks, timeframe is not important. That is, let the dimensionality remain in pips/ms.
The timeframe is not important on ticks. The sampling itself is important. By the way, all those impulses are noise. It is important to extract the useful one.
 
Daniil Stolnikov:
I read an article somewhere on the web - it said many have tried to do this but so far no one has succeeded))

There's no need to be so complicated about it. The machine has already written down how to count. And I will add a screenshot, which has something to compare (the old indicator, no changes):

Good topic, good. I started to do it once, but did not go beyond acceleration, for nothing useful noticed. And here you have a jump). Well done, Automatic. Gave a good impulse to the branch.

 
Artyom Trishkin:
The timeframe is not important on the ticks. It's the sampling itself that matters. By the way, all these impulses are noise. The important thing is to isolate the useful one.

------
Noise.... filtered out by dc kitchen filters!
:-)
Anything useful by them has long since been stolen before us.
That's to the point about the meaning of the ticks test from ducas.
You have to write real time them with your own...
There to watch...
 
new-rena:

There's no need to be so complicated about it. The machine has already written down how to count. And I'll add a screenshot to compare (the old indicator, no changes):

Good topic, good. I started to do it some time ago, but did not go further than acceleration, because I have not noticed anything useful. And here you have a jump). Well done, Automatic. Gave a good impulse to the branch.

Where's the index? Where's the indyck? :-)
 
Roman Shiredchenko:
Where's the Indyk? Where's the indyck? :-)
      for(i=Bars-1; i>=0; i--)
         {
            MA[i]=iMA(NULL,0,Delta,0,MODE_EMA,PRICE_CLOSE,i);
         }         
      for(i=Bars-1; i>=0; i--)
         {
            SPEED[i]=NormalizeDouble((MA[i]-MA[i+Delta])/POINT,0);
         }
      for(i=Bars-1; i>=0; i--)
         {
            ACCELERATE[i]=SPEED[i]-SPEED[i+Delta];
         }
      for(i=Bars-1; i>=0; i--)
         {
            LEAP[i]=ACCELERATE[i]-ACCELERATE[i+Delta];
         }
 
Олег avtomat:

I've noticed for a long time that anything that doesn't make sense in your head, you blithely define as "nonsense"... Open some books and figure it out...

Velocity can very well be negative, and it wouldn't surprise you so much if you knew that velocity is a vector. Open the books, and figure it out...

The rest of the graphs have a similar lack of meaning -- to you, since ... Open the books, and figure it out...

The formula No. 1 is given for illustration, as it was previously indicated there - to draw the graphs... Open your books and figure it out...

Books are written by idiots for nothing

How fast are you going? Minus 10,000?

A vector so what? The definition of a vector quantity doesn't say anything about a negative value!!! It's two points with a direction. Reread the books yourself again - you must have forgotten
 
Олег avtomat:

Formula No. 1 is given for clarity, as it was stated there beforehand - to draw the graphs... Open the books and figure it out...

What do you see there? You'll never be able to draw a Forex formula.
12345678910111213141516...48
New comment