Strategic foresight systems - page 48
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
https://forum.mql4.com/ru/42798
The main argument of TA supporters is that you just don't know how to use it, so it doesn't work for you. My answer is that you just don't know how to make predictions, which is why it (prediction) is doomed.
But seriously, I am interested in the possible direction of the incipient strong moves. When it will happen is clear, but where is 50/50. And only the radiations will probably open this veil of uncertainty.
The main argument of TA supporters is that you just don't know how to use it, so it doesn't work for you. My answer is that you just can't make predictions, so it's doomed.
But seriously, I am interested in the possible direction of the incipient strong moves. When it will happen is clear, but where is 50/50. And only the radiations will perhaps open this veil of uncertainty.
It's simpler than that. You just don't know what is happening now. You can't even tell rain from snow as you are thinking of lilies of the month of July next year.
What do you mean you can't predict? How the hell is that? In the Vacuum, right?
А...
It's simpler than that. You just don't know how to understand what is happening now. You can't even tell rain from snow as you think of lilies in July next year.
What do you mean you can't predict? How the hell is that? Forecasting in the Vacuum, right?
А...
"... now" is history, and any transaction takes place in the future. That's what TA was invented for.
Modelling future price or TS behaviour is what forecasting is all about. Therefore, to be able to predict, one must be able to model.
"... now" is history, and any deal is in the future. That's what TA was invented for.
Modeling the future behaviour of the price or TS is forecasting. Therefore, to be able to predict, one must be able to simulate.
Do you have a pen?
===
What have you done to amuse G-d so much that here - frolic...
Suit yourself. Idiots....
...... When it will happen is clear.....
Please specify with what and how.
Take a look here.
Do you have a pen?
===
What have you done to amuse G-d so much that you frolick...
Suit yourself. Idiots....
It is always a pleasure to talk to such a clever man, especially as you do not dignify everyone with your attention.
I don't believe in predictions, like you, but I make them. I told somewhere that even if I had an almanac of quotes until 2056, 95% of traders would lose their micro deposits.
"... now" is history, and any transaction is in the future. That's what TA was invented for.
Modeling the future behaviour of the price or TS is forecasting. Therefore, to be able to predict, one must be able to simulate.
Almost a year has passed and some things have been finalised. On page 26, the forecast figure was like this:
After the refinement, the algorithm became a bit smarter, learning to calculate the confidence bounds correctly so that the graph is within the probability range.
The improvements were achieved by removing a lot of errors, introducing a new dimension into the phase space of the model and refining the calculations using MMH, SSE2 and OpenMP technologies which give an increase in the speed of calculations. Now the place of the reversal looks like this:
This is a complicated and time-consuming business and there is no end in sight yet...
P.S. The candlesticks and their number in five and four are a bit different for some reason.
P.S. According to my tests, the same code in С++ is 6-12 times faster than in MQL5, and when using OpenMP the difference increases up to 15 times, therefore if you want to count something much, you better learn С++. Although the introduction of OpenCL support in F5 looks interesting and perhaps it can compensate for its significant lag in calculation speed compared to C++. I have not run speed comparison tests on the fourth one, for obvious reasons.
The other drawing was like this:
Became this: