and wandering around randomly again... - 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
mother teresa showed up....
It's about hypocrisy...I don't show off and don't put on a mask of decency like he does...that's it...
and i don't use the internet or anonymity... I'll say the same to your face...
Современная агрессивная посредственность - это еще один пример компенсации скудоумия с помощью внешних эффектов, например, громогласных, обильных, напыщенных словесных излияний. Наши "модернисты" напоминают подростков переходного возраста, которые воображают, что понимают все на свете, могут рассуждать на любые темы, которые презирают все то, к чему раньше относились с почтением, как к истине, и думают, что они вполне оригинальны, хотя лишь повторяют старые заблуждения. Такие хвастливые претензии на полную интеллектуальную независимость лишь плохо прикрывают величайшую произвольность и несостоятельность суждений и глубокую неуверенность в себе.
Dietrich von Hildebrand "The New Tower of Babel"
Are you telling me that you are compensating for your lack of intelligence and the inconsistency of your theories with forum chatter?
I don't want to engage in political battles. Do you seriously not understand or are you being provocative? This is ridiculous.
I seriously don't know what you're talking about...
So tell me... once you've started...
I seriously don't know what you're talking about...
So tell me already... once you've started...
If you don't get it right away, spelling it out won't help.
...
What is market efficiency? It is volatility (increment after detrending) which is a stationary process, i.e. the distribution law is ideally normal.
But it is absolutely not. Stationarity does not smell. And currently the main move is the GARCH models based on the fat tail test. The modelling process continues until the residual from the model is stationary! And this result is extremely difficult to achieve. This can be clearly seen in the quantile-quantile plot.
Explain what you have written here?
"It's volatility..." - is sort of an answer to the question "What is market efficiency?".
However, the sentence "This volatility is a stationary process..." doesn't look like an answer to the question, more like a challenge to something, and replacing that something with volatility.
What "it" is absolutely not? That the data after detrending is not stationary?
***
All in all, it has long been the impression that you are just verbiage (if not worse, but as it is). You're just going over and over in terms of nothing.
=========
Oleg avtomat, did you also work at a Soviet design bureau?
==============
In short - you can not connect two words intelligently here, and argue about the works of Nobel laureates. But with a kind of such clever, that do not approach near, at once exposing all and everyone as a feeble-minded. And in fact, as if it would not turn out to be the opposite - that you are just blabbermouths, like monkeys with glasses with scientific terms.
These are all emotions, and there is evidence that you, like all these nobodies, are completely wrong.
But that is absolutely not the case. There is no smell of stationarity.
So what? The same communications and radar, including interference, are all about non-stationary signal processes. And it doesn't bother anyone at all.
What's up? Nothing's up! How about what? How about we learn the math for the financial markets, how about we go back to radar?
Faah, you've been fixated on finding stationarity for years.
But it's a fiction. It doesn't exist. It's about time you realised that.
If we make a comparison, the matchmaking for finn markets looks like a kind of a nerd who picked up the top bits from applied mathematical disciplines, which, among others, include radar.
What's up? Nothing's up! Or maybe what? Or maybe we'll learn the math for financial markets, or maybe we'll go back to radar?
You seem to have delusions of grandeur.) You know everything. Who needs to master what)).
I, for one, find your search for stationarity in residuals strange. Why should they be stationary? I'll answer it myself: Not at all.) Stationary or not, the process is still random and even if you see something in it and remove it, it is far from being stationary.
And in fact, SanSanych, there is no special matrix for financial markets. There isn't.