What if it works? - 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
Even at the level of terminology, TA and mathematical methods are incompatible.
Yes? OK, please demonstrate inconsistency in terminology.
indicator - there is no such term, or it is used in a completely different sense.
Bollinger Bands - incomplete correspondence, envelope.
MA - incomplete correspondence, filter.
I think that's enough.) Otherwise we'll have to make a dictionary.)
indicator - there is no such term, or it is used in a completely different sense.
Bollinger Bands - incomplete correspondence, envelope.
MA - incomplete correspondence, filter.
I think that's enough.) Otherwise we'll have to make a dictionary).
You describe the differences in the terminology of TA and MA(mathematical analysis), what does it have to do with bb bands and the indicator in general?
I don't understand you. If TA has no terminology, then it does not exist as a field at all. Then there's nothing to talk about).
By the way, by the way, there are no support/resistance levels in maths either.
I don't understand you. If TA has no terminology, then it does not exist as a field at all. Then there is nothing to talk about).
By the way, and there are no support/resistance levels in mathematics.
You make me laugh.
You claim that TA and MA are different things. TA has a definition and MA has a definition. So let's sort out why TA doesn't use MA and why MA can't use the techniques of TA.
You make me laugh.
You say TA and AI are different things. TA has a definition and AI has a definition. So let's sort out why TA doesn't use MA and why MA can't use TA techniques.
Almost every TA book defines "TA is not a science but an art".
AI, signal processing etc. by their very definition cannot use art methods.
TA, as art, can use whatever it wants. But the result will also be similar - art.
Either singing or dancing).
On the other hand, the market cannot be accurately mathematically described, so it is also an art:)
The market is a combo of exact mathematics (which includes probability theory) + knowledge of people's psychology.
Almost every TA book defines "TA is not a science, but an art".
AI, signal processing etc. by their very definition cannot use art methods.
TA, as art, can use whatever it wants. But the result will be similar - art.
Either singing or dancing).
I don't see definitions of TA and AI in your post. I see only that in art books they allegedly write about TA... They write a lot about TA in fiction books too, so what?
Let's get to the point. Or is it "yada yada yada, tru yada yada..." as usual?
I don't see definitions of TA and MA in your post. All I see is that fiction books supposedly write about TA... They write a lot about MA in fiction books too, so what?
Let's get closer to the question. Or is it the usual "yada yada, tru yada..."?
I don't see any specifics on your part either. Only trolling.
In principle, I have written everything. Sapienti sat. I do not intend to spell it out.