Market phenomena - page 18
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
Indeed, it's hard to believe that everyone is fixated on these histograms. There are plenty of examples when the phenomena were discovered due to some incorrectness, such as unwashed test tubes).
All the more a more sympathetic recipe for a division into processes has been given, although not in sufficient detail. And the more so that the idea of division into two processes has been floating around on this forum for some time, for example avtomat (not to go far) has also got a mixture of two processes, the scheme is not quite clear though.
I have a question to Sergei, in the second recipe are the same rows allocated or not quite the same?
Unfortunately, not the same. I'm fed up with "curves", I'm struggling for linear purity of processes :o) (described in more detail on previous page)
Unfortunately, not the same. I'm fed up with "curves", I'm struggling for linear purity of processes :o) (on the previous page I described it in more detail).
Why unfortunately? :) That's just as well, you can just forget about them for now :)
You can't, you'll see why later on. The processes you classify/filter should be more "predictable". Otherwise, the model will turn out to be bad. However, I might have misunderstood you again.
It feels like you and Avals have only read the first few sentences. I'll wait until you've mastered the whole text. I am in no hurry.
Sergei, I am in no hurry either. I carefully re-examined the first posts of the thread. All I found was a detailed confirmation of my post, including a remark about rational relations.
Right in your own pictures. See for yourself, please.
So there you go. By the way, your phenomenon has a name. It's called interference. ;)
you cannot, it will be clear later on why. The processes you classify/filter must be more 'predictable'. Otherwise, the model will turn out to be bad. However, I may have misunderstood you again.
but what about the sigmoid transformed increments, I've observed the phenomenon on this as well?
Oh, that should be even funnier.
If you didn't normalise the results (which I hope you did), then the interference harmonics should have an increased frequency closer to the centre, and be more sparse at the edges. Is there such a thing?
:)
--
Shit or vice versa. I don't know. So the frequency has to be modulated. I don't know which way it should go. ))
evenly throughout the distribution was
:) Yeah. Looks like I've gone a bit wrong after all. Probably just amplitude modulation. I'll check it in Excel now, on a random series.
got my "magic blots" out of the stash http://imglink.ru/pictures/08-07-11/6cfc9d1ddd356b2bbef263e32d4cf3c0.jpg
the yellow lines are future price consolidation levels, but when the price will be there and in what sequence the trajectory will be, I cannot even guess