Probability, how do you turn it into a pattern ...? - page 16
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
There are also stats posted there that bear little resemblance to the system described... What do you think?
Dear Author, if you want to be listened to respectfully, answer _that_ question of mine, if you can't answer it then please don't use any more probability theory here. OK? :) And since you haven't answered for a very long time, you'll probably be asked again here .... and ask for a quick answer. :)
To all - here :) I think I've invented a simple way - to quickly and painlessly separate sellers of "magic ointments" from people who should be treated with respect and helped to understand ... If a person does not understand the _substance_ but defines terms, he is another Lysenko 100%.
Neveteran, у Вас какая-то нездоровая нелюбовь к Эллиотту. И за что? У нас тут есть персонаж, который только по Эллиотту и торгует - причем, судя по многочисленным скринам, успешно :)
И, в конце концов, проясните же мне, в третий раз вопрос задаю:
Что означает Ваше "в периоде", черт побери?
Most likely "at the limit". Like when time is striving towards infinity.
Most likely "at the limit". Like when time goes to infinity.
And up, doesn't he mean down? :)
What difference does it make. It makes no difference to the system anyway.
А вверх, не означает у него вниз? :)
Maybe so. Even purely out of interest and without trying to assess the author in any way, one has to agree that he gives away a lot of "pseudo-science". And in the markets you have to understand (and consequently explain) everything very clearly and concretely. But his clarity is so far behind a forest of "terms". Even if there is something in the "idea", it is difficult to get this grain out, because you have to interpret a lot in your own way.
Yeah - :))) The top is what? More expensive, and the bottom? Cheaper. What's the price of the top and the bottom? - Cheap, and bought? - expensive. So whatever, it's only as if you swap with the DC... :) And if you mean this "system"? So far I haven't even taken the time to read it - and no mistake, as you can see. That's the impression so far, at least.
I view everything that happens as a primitive upward and downward price movement. And that is enough for me, especially since it is an absolutely repetitive phenomenon. The calculation of the probability of obtaining results under the same starting conditions will steadily tend to the value of 50/50 for a period. And this trend is also absolutely systematic.
tends not due to compensation, but because the probability is estimated as a frequency and the deviation will "wash out" as the test series increases
Flip a correct coin 10 times and the eagle/thread fell 6/4, then flip another 90 times and it fell 45/45.
In the beginning (after 10 flips) the frequencies were 0.6 and 0.4, and after 100 flips they are 0.51 and 0.49. Therefore, the time deviation from 50/50 does not have to be compensated by the reverse deviation.
However, you have already been written about it....
Уважаемый Автор, если Вы хотите чтобы Вас слушали с уважением, ответьте на _тот_ мой вопрос, если Вы на него ответить не можете то пожалуйста больше не употребляйте тут ничего из теории врероятности. Ладо? :) И так как Вы очень долго не давали ответа, то вполне вероятно Вас спросят тут еще раз - и попросят ответить быстро.
Ко всем - вот :) я кажется придумал простой способ быстро и безболезненно отделять продавцов "волшебных мазей" от людей к которым надо отгосится уважительно и помогать разобраться ... Если человек не понимает сути но опрерирует терминами - то это очередной Лысенко.
The rules you are now trying to set for me are merely your method of creating an environment (communication) in which the existence of a question has a motive to compel an answer.
It sounds like an ultimatum, which is a bit of a stretch, but essentially doesn't matter. I just 'blew it' with this question, it just happened that way, sorry. But my making excuses is probably satisfactory to you.
Where in nature does the normal distribution come from? From an incredible number of factors, values, assumptions, occurrences, - FROM CHAOS STRUCTURE.
Applying the standard mathematical approach of averaging all things, we get averaged values by priferring (relating, shifting) them relative to each other (and actually in time). "The normal distribution depends on two parameters - displacement and scale, is mathematically not one distribution, but a whole family of them. The values of the parameters correspond to the values of the mean (mathematical expectation) and the variance (standard deviation)"
But the question is tricky, isn't it?
And ahead of the curve, the notion of the mean mathematical expectation, in uncorrelated experiments, excludes (reverses) the tendency of expectation stabilisation.
Periodic defragmentation of supernumbers is a good example. Is that what you wanted to hear?
And not to overcomplicate with continuous random variables what would be the distribution of the "magic" ( with 32000 faces) cube?
If there is nothing wrong with the cube, you know the answer. :)))