How do you feel about the riskiest trading strategy, namely unwinding the deposit. - page 9
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
That is not what we are talking about now. It's about the representation of reality by means of probability theory and the conclusions it draws. And I could write you a book on causality.
about causality was addressed to your opponent ;)
But TV's conclusions about reality... don't match reality ;)
"well, somewhere like this... five or seven" (remember the joke?)
about causality was addressed to your opponent ;)
But TV's conclusions about reality... are inconsistent with reality ;)
"well, somewhere like this... five or seven" (remember the joke?)
TV is a model and, like any model, works in some areas of phenomena and may well not work elsewhere.
In order to apply a model to describe something, a methodological assessment of its applicability to that object must first be made.
TV is a model and, like any model, it works in some fields and may well not work in others.
Does your TV model work in our field? Does it correspond to reality?
The claim that the future is supposedly independent of the past is nonsense.
The hackneyed example of the coin (which is supposed to be perfect) is also nonsense, far from reality.
Unscientific nonsense.
Any theorist book says on the first page that a coin has no memory.
Write to the nobel committee and ask them for a nobel prize.
Well, does your TV model work in our field?
unscientific nonsense.
any theorist book says on the first page that the coin has no memory. and you're saying otherwise?
write to the nobel committee and ask them for a nobel prize.
you don't even know what you're talking about...
you don't even know what you're talking about...
The question is complicated. I haven't fully understood it yet. I cannot categorically state anything. After all, as they say in America: "If you're so smart, where's your money?"
there was a time when they tried to impose this sham template on us here too...
there was a time when they tried to impose this sham template on us here too...
Well, let's put it this way. I would not be so quick to label statistics as a bad thing, even though it may be "stalling" somewhere. Statistics is a broad methodology, and the laws it derives depend on the properties of the objects it describes. For example, quantum statistics describe by different laws the behaviour of bosons and fermions, which are characterised by different internal symmetries.
It is possible that if there are (if they, of course, really exist) financial and economic objects which do not fit into the framework of classical statistics, they have a set of some complex internal symmetries and relations, which, being taken into account by the mathematical apparatus, will give an adequate statistical theory for them.
Well, let's put it this way. I would not be so quick to label statistics as a bad thing, even though it may be "stuck" somewhere. Statistics is a broad methodology, and the laws it derives depend on the properties of the objects it describes. For example, quantum statistics describe by different laws the behaviour of bosons and fermions, which are characterised by different internal symmetries.
It is possible that if there are (if they really exist, of course) financial and economic objects that do not fit into the framework of classical statistics, they have a set of some complex internal symmetries and relations, which, being accounted for by the mathematical apparatus, will give an adequate statistical theory for them.
Um... I was actually talking about this one you cited, the fallacy pattern:"If you're so smart, where's your money?". And you're already seeing the labels supposedly attached to your sacred cow...