Cyclical patterns in the market - page 4
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
do you know how to make money on sb?
no. no one does, even those who think or say they do.
"Long and unsuccessful" is just like a forex slogan!
This does not apply to all of my forex jobs, and I believe that this is a slogan for any successful job, because forex is a scientific activity and any activity leads to self-development, the more you work, the more you learn. It is not so bad really))
This does not apply to all of my forex trading jobs and I believe that this is a slogan for any successful job, because forex is a scientific activity and any activity leads to self-development, the more you work, the more you learn. It is not so bad really))
100%, otherwise I wouldn't be showing off here))
no. no one can, even those who think or say they can.
well.... are you all-knowing? what are you saying? the sb does not mean an ideal sb considered by the theories, there is no ideal in nature. all attempts to recreate an ideal sb are technical, and they have their own actions and consequences. Besides, earning on cb does not mean predicting cb even in a series, this is confusing, the ability to earn on cb does not contradict the properties of cb.
This is what actually happened. I have always noticed that the up period is followed by a down period on a random entry and in the long term the spread is simply lost, and on the yield chart you can see the fractality, i.e. self-similarity of large parts to small ones. But I'm thinking long and unsuccessfully about how to use it. Is it the right direction? Or am I missing something else?
No, friend, you are looking in the wrong direction.
It's not the results of deals that are important, but the way the lines representing performed deals are placed on the chart. That's where the clue hides...
well there.... are you omniscient? what are you saying? the sb does not mean an idyllic sb considered by the theories, there is no ideal in nature. all attempts to recreate an idyllic one are technical, and they have their actions and consequences.
So, explain, what kind of a ball is it meant to be?
Also, earning on sb does not mean predicting sb even in a series (1), this is confusing, the ability to earn on sb does not contradict the properties of sb (2).
1) means 2) contradicts
SZZ People have been struggling, researching and proving for decades, and you come along and say, "Oh, it's all bullshit!
So, explain, what kind of cb is meant?
1) means 2) contradicts
ZS People have been struggling, researching and proving for dozens of years, and you come along and say, "This is all bullshit!
What did they research and what did they use to prove their theories? I do not have a strong scientific background, I can give you a list of people here with whom you have obviously faced, but for some reason did not enter into an argument, but their credibility you are clearly not in doubt, but they probably will not prove with you, although they put forward the same "false" for you statements
What were they researching and what were they proving, theories or what? it is not ideal in nature, there is no such thing as gpsh. don't talk about the quality of gpsh and its variations.
What does gpsh have to do with it?
there are absolutely random noises which form absolutely random SBs. After all, there is Brownian motion, which is where the SB song came from and which is perfect SB in essence.
After all, there are generators of not "pseudo" but rather random numbers (so-called generators with internal source of entropy), which also form a perfect SB.
Let's have the list, yeah, it's interesting.
https://forum.mql4.com/ru/50578/page9
2nd 3rd post from the bottom, sorry, a lot of things have been taken down irretrievably. of course you won't see the Nobel Prize written there.