A variant of the proof of the first axiom of Dow - page 2
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
and in order to predict it, it is necessary and sufficient to have data on its change over time", depending onsupply and demand!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What do you care what the price depends on, if you believe that only its past values are sufficient to predict it?
It's not past values that are sufficient, it's past values depending on supply and demand!:)
It is not enough to have past values, but past values depending on supply and demand!:)
There are past euro/dollar quotes and separately past euro/dollar quotes depending on supply and demand?
There are past quotations for EUR/USD and separately past quotations for EUR/USD depending on supply and demand?
If you have Demand, Supply (in volumes) and the resulting Price at a given point in time,
Then you have a necessary and sufficient reason to predict the price with a known Supply and Demand at a given point in time:)
I believe that is what the author of the axiom in question meant:)
But, since in the forex market, we do not know the Supply and Demand both in the present
and in the future, the price of which we wish to predict,
Then you and I do not have the necessary and sufficient conditions to predict the price:)
And you and I are working in the absence of necessary and sufficient information:)
And hence all the consequences of such work:)
Yusuf, with all due respect, give the signal what has been asked of you for years. We are not in the MSU department ...
P.S. You always say there is no developer ... I'm ready to put your idea into code. But based on your topics - this is the first and last time!
Which states: "The market price takes into account all the factors affecting it according to the law of supply and demand, and in order to forecast it it is necessary and sufficient to have data on its change over time" (Rhea, Robert. Dow Theory,- New York; Barrons, 1932. and Greiner, P. and H. C. Whitcomb: Dow Theory, - New York: Investor's Intelligence, 1969. and other sources).
Dear Yusuf, the point is that axioms do not require proof, unlike theorems. This truth has been taught to us since primary school. Axioms are demonstrable and absolute truths which cannot be doubted. For example, that 2 + 2 = 4. (Now, some clever people will say that 2 + 2 = 5). Or that it is possible to draw only one line through two points on the plane. Or the fact that parallel lines never intersect (again, the smart guys will say that they do).
Consequently, if Doe's thesis is an axiom, (and it undoubtedly is), then proving it makes no sense. To prove it is to initially presuppose the possible incorrectness of the thesis. If we could prove that the market price does not include all factors, we would disprove the axiom. However, it is impossible to disprove the axiom and proving it is pointless.
Yousufkhodja Sultonov:
The authority of the Dow does not allow us to doubt the validity of this axiom, and most market researchers use this fact and direct their efforts to study the price behavior. But it would be useful to prove this axiom to give it more confidence and warn some people from overzealous search of other factors such as volumes, OM, news and other factors influencing the price and thereby, in their subconsciousness, challenging the globality of Dow's conclusion.
...Based on the absolute equality of the formulas (1) and (2) we conclude that the Dow prophecy in the form of the first axiom can be a proven theorem, since it contains no other variables, except the price, and traders and market researchers can safely rely on the price analysis in their researches, without distracting on other market parameters.
I would like to disagree with you here. Sorry.
Price of course includes all the factors that determine it, but how do you isolate them from there? Knowing that the price includes everything, unfortunately, does not give us anything to improve the forecast. Imagine a hydrometeorological centre where all the staff sit and look at a big poster on the wall saying "The weather includes all the factors that determine it!". Then those employees open the windows and forecast the weather by sticking their heads out. After all, for them, the current temperature, humidity and amount of precipitation on the pavement add up to a personal physical sensation as they look out of the windows onto the street. Everything is already there in the air, in the sky, in the sunset, in the raindrops... What opportunities do they have for reliable forecasting if they do not have diverse and clear data on air currents, atmospheric pressure and the like? If they cannot assess changes in these parameters in real time and analyse on history? Alas...
So, reliable data on volumes, EI, news and whatnot, is paramount for qualitative analysis. Maybe that's why we don't have it all? ))
Dear Yusuf, the point is that axioms do not require proof, unlike theorems. This truth has been taught to us since primary school. Axioms are demonstrable and absolute truths which cannot be doubted. For example, that 2 + 2 = 4. (Now, some clever people will say that 2 + 2 = 5). Or that it is possible to draw only one line through two points on the plane. Or that parallel lines never intersect (here the clever ones will say that they do).
Consequently, if Doe's thesis is an axiom, (and it undoubtedly is), then proving it makes no sense. To prove it is to initially presuppose the possible incorrectness of the thesis. If we could prove that the market price does not include all factors, we would disprove the axiom. However, it is impossible to disprove the axiom and proving it is pointless.
Yusuf, with all due respect, give the signal what has been asked of you for years. We are not in the MSU department ...
P.S. You always say there is no developer ... I'm ready to put your idea into code. But based on your topics - this is the first and last time!