Stochastic resonance - page 22
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
And I'm here for the same reasons. But for the rest of my life... I think that's too much.
I will create a profitable strategy, I will start making money, but what else is there to do? Don't you have more interesting things to do in life?
Or another option: I will not create in the foreseeable future this proverbial strategy, so what, continue to fight windmills? What for? To prove something to whom? Doesn't life have more interesting things to do?
Well, now it's my turn to console you, at least you won't get away with good advice. The advice doesn't sparkle with novelty, and I'd even say it's a bit conservative, but don't ignore it: a pint of good ale will return you to your former strength, raise your spirits, broaden your mind, clear your thinking and sort out all the windmills.
Sergei, you missed something important. There is more optimism in my reply than even in Niroba's posts waving his stats :-)) It's just that this optimism has nothing to do with forex. Thank God I have many things in my life that are more interesting than forex. Does the idea to spend the whole life in the fight against Forex inspire you with joy, courage, pioneering spirit? :-)
I try to look at things soberly and calmly. There were millions of them who lost their teeth in forex. Many of them I could envy in terms of giftedness. But I won't, I'm grateful for what I have as well. And if I, fighting this mega (it's definitely not a windmill) alone, fail to overpower it, there's nothing sad or surprising about that. For me it is free creativity, continuation of scientific research, cognition of the world, cognition of myself. Of course I want money too, but not so much that I would have to switch my life over to ......
As for co-creation, I don't think so. You need a team with good relations and even better mutual understanding, where money would not be a reason for conflicts. And, of course, with an acknowledged and sensible leader, here I absolutely agree with Victor. At the initial stage, when the general concept, basic ideas and a master plan are being formed, it is very important to be able to communicate directly. In the forum format it is quite difficult. But if it turns out to be interesting.
I stated my attitude to the Grail in my profile in red letters ("There is no Grail, f*ck all believers!"). The true meaning of that statement is not that there is no Grail (I am a believer), but that it is very difficult to produce. Nevertheless, a few thousand people stick around, and by my estimation, less than 1% of them make good money in real life (hundreds of % a year). What do the rest do here?
Personally, I myself see Foreh as an extreme challenge to my mental faculties. And I haven't yet reached the point of despair where I have to admit defeat in my fight against this monster. Generally speaking, the vast majority of Foreh's patients have an IQ well above average: only very intelligent people could, in principle, pay serious attention to such an application of their powers. The rest of the vast majority of people living on Earth are simply incapable of seeing this possibility, as they consider it something above their abilities (and do not very cleverly equate this game with a game of roulette).
Nevertheless, statistics (and where do they come from?) say that at least 90% of these very clever people leak. And more and more people are joining the ranks of money-bag applicants. Maybe it's all about the innate tendency of a smart person to gamble (with prudent risk management, of course) - anywhere, not just here? And, of course, the opportunity to socialise with his peers?
2 eugenk:
Hi! Thanks for the question :), thanks to it there is a reason to make a point about what I put in the word "potential".
Suppose we have some kind of model for the behaviour of the quantity of interest (i.e. an equation or system of equations where it is present as a variable). For example, Newton's model, known to everyone who has more or less successfully studied in secondary school, is: ma = F. If the force (F) (or its part) depends only on the coordinate of the object (the variable we are interested in), we are entitled to assume that there is some entity in space, the manifestation of which is the force (part of the force). It is reasonable to assume that this entity is somehow connected with such a fundamental thing as energy. Let's denote this energy by U. By dimensional gatherings, we have only two options to describe this relationship F = U/x and F=dU/dx. The first variant is bad because it leads to a dependence of the force on a subjectively chosen origin, so the second variant was chosen. For the quantity U defined in this way the name potential energy or simply potential was adopted.
Now let's turn to the term "steady state". Stability means nothing other than the fact that when an object tries to leave this state, a force arises that tries to bring it back. So we have a force that depends on the coordinate, which allows us toformally introduce potential into the model. Obviously, depending on the direction of this attempt, the force will have a different sign, that is, the potential will have an extremum at the equilibrium point. Nothing prevents us from choosing the sign of the potential so that it is a minimum. This minimum (together with the vicinity) is called the potential well.
To summarise: The concept of steady state automatically leads us to the concept of potential and potential well.
For example, in my definition there is no statement that potential is the only source of the force acting on the object. The law of conservation of energy is not involved in the definition either. There is no statement about dependence/independence of potential on any parameters and, if the first, about a type of such dependence. That is, if the word potential as applied to the market causes some aversion, consider whether there is not an automatic transfer of additional properties of potential from models designed to describe some other objects.
As for some observations, there is not much to add to what you have said. Except to specify - trend lines are also support-resistance levels, only dynamic. But that is not my observation either. I mainly post less reliable observations and suppositions as they emerge, i.e. in fact I have already shared them, including in this thread. It is for the purpose of discussion and cooperation. Also, to increase the variety of possible forms of discussion and cooperation, I have made my postal address easily accessible :)
Hehe, Victor, I've never seen you so verbose (and not only in this thread). Must be some kind of the pulling-party effect, like the end of the week?
I stated my attitude to the Grail in my profile in red letters ("There is no Grail, f*ck all believers!"). The true meaning of that statement is not that there is no Grail (I am a believer), but that it is very difficult to produce. Nevertheless, a few thousand people stick around, and by my estimation, less than 1% of them make good money in real life (hundreds of % a year). What do the rest do here?
Personally, I myself see Foreh as an extreme challenge to my mental faculties. And I haven't yet reached the point of despair where I have to admit defeat in my fight against this monster. Generally speaking, the vast majority of those affected by the Forrecht have an IQ well above average: only very clever people could, in principle, pay serious attention to such an application of their powers. The rest of the vast majority of people living on Earth are simply unable to see this possibility, as they consider it something above their abilities (and not very cleverly equate this game with a game of roulette).
Nevertheless, statistics (and where do they come from?) say that at least 90% of these very clever people leak. And more and more people are joining the ranks of money-bag applicants. Maybe it's all about the innate tendency of a smart person to gamble (with prudent risk management, of course) - anywhere, not just here? And, of course, the opportunity to socialise with his peers?
I have just got stuck after preparing to the contest. I will be recovering from it for a long time yet. It took me three weeks for the advisor. The homies cried during that time. And during a race, mistakes are always made.
And one gets the feeling that one likes the process itself. I wrote about it yesterday. I made an advisor. Yes, it makes money on history, but not all of it. I'm scrapping it. I make another one. I make another one. The same thing. It seems we cannot make our EA profitable on the entire history (although we can), if we removes all errors from my Expert Advisor, it will work on any type of history. The only problem is it is too complicated and time consuming.
Sergei, you have missed something important. There is more optimism in my reply than even in Niroba's posts waving his stats around :-)) It's just that this optimism has nothing to do with forex. Thank God I have many things in my life that are more interesting than forex. Does the idea to spend the whole life in the fight against Forex inspire you with joy, courage, pioneering spirit? :-)
I try to look at things soberly and calmly. There were millions of them who lost their teeth in forex. Many of them I could envy in terms of giftedness. But I won't, I'm grateful for what I have as well. And if I, fighting this mega (it's definitely not a windmill) alone, fail to overpower it, there's nothing sad or surprising about that. For me it is free creativity, continuation of scientific research, cognition of the world, cognition of myself. Of course I want money too, but not so much that I'd have to switch my life over to ......
And as for the joint creation, it is unlikely. You need a team, with good relations, with even better mutual understanding, for which money would not be the cause of conflicts. And, of course, with a recognized and savvy leader, here I absolutely agree with Victor. At the initial stage, when the general concept, basic ideas and a master plan are being formed, it is very important to be able to communicate directly. In the forum format it is quite difficult. But if it works, it will be interesting.
That was a joke, and I thought it was very witty. )) And as for fighting, even wise samurai used to say that you have to win before the fight starts, which I have managed to do, in a sense.
And as for co-creation, that's an interesting idea. I will think about it, maybe I will post my old developments in trading on local extrema (you and I discussed that subject more than once, if you remember). There is something interesting there.
So it turns out that the process is the highest, absolute value ... .
So it turns out that the process is the highest, absolute value ... .
A year for the candles and a year and a half for neuronics.
This is great! I've seen a lot of newbies or just horny people trying to measure their pips, and here - grandfathers trying to measure their beards! I want in too. :-)))
I've been working on my system for two and a half years now. But I have never changed the direction of my research. And probably I won't. If nothing comes of it - I'll have to retrain as a manager.
I think grasn has something to boast about, too.
I've probably underestimated the length of time I've been working on my system. Certainly not a year, it has been maturing for a long time before that: the first posts on it were over 2 years ago on metaquotes, but even earlier, much earlier, there was something on spider. But it wasn't until a year ago that there was confidence that something would work with it.