The market is a controlled dynamic system. - page 288
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
examples are not correct....
i'll tell you more...even you can control the market...
all you need to do is find the right amount of dough ))))
The essence of the conversation is not about pipe dreams (like sitting down with a suitcase of money and managing the world economy). The point is to identify market behaviour, manageable and spontaneous processes. For further filtering (separation of controlled and spontaneous events) in order to predict and gain a profit. EUR/USD is an example. What proposals do you have on this subject?
P.S. Please do not get into a contradictory argument that leads to a dead-end.
The essence of the conversation is not about dreaming big dreams (how you sit with a suitcase of money and manage the world economy). The point is to identify market behaviour, manageable and spontaneous processes. For further filtering (separation of controlled and spontaneous events) in order to predict and gain a profit. An example is EUR/USD. What are your suggestions about this subject?
P.S. Please do not engage in a contradictory argument leading to a dead end.
Fact: Huge US debt.
Consequence... The dollar is not going to turn into a phoney.
and the quid is a phoney...and the m3 hasn't been published for like 5 years...etc...
You were given a specific construct in the first sentence...
You say yes to me, I say no to you. You say no, I say yes. A dialogue like that is a dead end. Afterwards, without changing tactics you and I can argue for ten years without coming to a conclusion (a ring with no beginning and no end). But if you think that the debt of $16,000,000,000 is good for the economy and that the growth of debt makes the economy stronger. Then I think you are simply not interested in the subject and your aim is to insert an ill-conceived post.
examples are not correct....
i'll tell you more...even you can drive the market...
all you need to do is find the right amount of dough ))))
I don't see any constructive in the first sentence.
P.S. Think about it. This is the realm of fantasy! The goal should be realistic based on the world we live in. At least a stable $150 a day.
Too serious an assumption.
Except that microscopic impacts are not stochastic. And every trader is stochastic, even a bot.Yes, I agree, these assumptions are, as the English say, a long shot. But there are still considerations such as.
1. It's not so serious if you understand where the stochastic description comes from in principle. Its source is precisely the "similarity" of the behaviour of a large number of small subsystems. And they don't necessarily all behave in exactly the same way. Personally, my understanding is that these formations in the market differ significantly in only one parameter, namely the forecasting horizon (or the average slope length, if you wish). And, by the way, with such an assumption follows automatically the statistical fractality which is observed experimentally.
2. If you look at it purely empirically, I personally see oscillatory price movements, and I see them on both M1 and D1. To me the presence of such movements means the presence of oscillatory degrees of freedom, and they are described by fairly simple linear equations. This is not bad enough for the induction of the model, and then it is possible to complicate it further.
3 And one more thing about macroscopic influences. From the point of view of an external observer, they are a stream of events, each one affecting the market with a certain intensity, each time shifting the equilibrium position to a new level. We seem to know how to describe the flows of events (see mass-service theory) and the equations give unambiguous answers.
I am not against the use of the term Managed Dynamic System as applied to the market. But I think you have a profound misunderstanding of the term "controlled". In first year students are taught differential equations with controlling forces. By controlling forces they mean external influences on the system. In this strictly scientific understanding of the terms, of course the market is manageable because its participants are guided not only by price history (internal parameter) but also by new information from outside - news, ecological reports, etc.
This is my understanding as well, if anything.
Do you have proof that the market is a controlled dynamic system? Do you have a mathematical formula directly determining the future of the market?
Let's go back to the explanatory picture.
What do I see in it!
Is the carrot the control, or is it the goal, and the control is taken over by man. Is the market being exploited, or yet. Does the inexperienced trader fall into the clutches of a ruthless market. The explanatory picture itself is more misleading.
The answer is needed here: The market is a controlled dynamic system YES or NO.
P.S. Maybe the branch itself is by implication. It would be! The market is a controlled dynamic system!
You're mixing two completely different concepts in one pile -- Goal and Control. But they are not the same thing at all.
A system has a purpose. A system has more than one way to reach the goal. Choosing one particular path from amongst the many possible ones is management. This choice is not random, but always made according to some optimality criteria.
The guy in the picture is going to his mother-in-law's house for pancakes (he has defined the goal). But his donkey (the executive mechanism) does not know his uncle's current goal, so the donkey needs to be controlled (to twist a carrot) to reach the goal. He can reach his mother-in-law in a straight line, but the way goes up and down a rugged terrain, round a hillock on the right and a swamp on the left... External factors bring their own limitations. And the donkey has to change the control signal from time to time, so that the donkey moves along the optimal, from the uncle's point of view, path.
I am not against the use of the term Managed Dynamic System as applied to the market. But I think you have a profound misunderstanding of the term "controlled". In first year students are taught differential equations with controlling forces. By controlling forces they mean external influences on the system. In this strictly scientific understanding of the terms, of course the market is controlled because its participants are guided not only by price history (internal parameter) but also by new information from outside - news, ecological reports, etc.
As you understand it, "controlled" means "manipulated", which is not the same thing. You even showed a picture of some uncle manipulating the direction of the market with a carrot. And now you set your mind to find out where the uncle has directed the carrot to make the donkey-market move there. You are a supporter of the conspiracy theory - that bankers and masons manipulate the market to get rich at the expense of its participants. Has it ever occurred to you that the market is run purely by random external forces, like war, or the ecological report? Look at market surges: they all happen at the moment of news release. Or do you think that these news and wars are also manipulated by Freemasons?
While you set yourself the super task of exposing the Freemasons, other traders simply wait for an external jolt (you can't predict its direction in most cases) and trade in the direction of the reaction, making money.
Where did I talk about Freemasons in the context of "Market - A Controlled Dynamic System"? I didn't. That's your speculation. It's "out of harm's way, into harm's way..."
And this saying of yours : "Has it ever occurred to you that the market is driven purely by random external forces, like war, or the econimic report?" is complete nonsense. And by the way, neither war nor economic crisis are random things. But in your mind both war and crisis are "purely accidental external forces". So it is better to speak not of your understanding, but of your misunderstanding.
1. It's not so serious if you understand where the stochastic description comes from in principle.
Moreover, stochasticity is already apparent in the solutions of the simplest nonlinear deterministic equations.
Let's hit the econometricians with the laws of physics !!!
;))))