The Sultonov system indicator - page 73
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
So, a young man goes to the Internet, comes across this picture, and everything is serious: "mining and metallurgical institute"... but where is the scientific title, degree, position?
It reads:
"Consider a linear relationship"... Okay, linear is linear. If it's linear, what's the MNC? Where did the X's in quarts come from?
At the beginning it's a scheme, and then it all comes down to solving systems of equations.
What is interesting, earlier the author of this work wrote that he was from a commercial institute, but now it turns out that he is from Mining and Metallurgy Institute, but his degree, rank and position are unknown.
At our institute, there was one charismatic character who worked as a janitor in a school building, and at his leisure, he wrote erotic stories on the wall of the toilet... I must say he wrote very well - there's something to remember)))
Worked for 13 years at the Institute of Economics and Trade of the Tajik State University of Commerce as an associate professor of the department of "Economics and Management in enterprises", and the last 5 years - at the Mining and Metallurgical Institute of Tajikistan as an associate professor of the department "Processing of mineral deposits". Is it forbidden to change jobs? It is not customary for us to flaunt one's academic degree and position where it is not required. And the fact that, indirectly, but deliberately, you suddenly compared the pages of a forum with a wall in a toilet, is the height of cynicism and blasphemy. Your astonishment "Where did the X's in the quads come from? ", is worthy of the highest praise in ignorance. when I showed that, Gauss originally proceeded from the assumption of minimising the sum of the squares of the difference of the unequal, that is where the inevitable appearance of X's in quarts comes from. Even lazy to decipher the abbreviation MNC - method of least squares, which would have kept you from silly surprise with a question mark. And the exclamation "If linear, what ISC?" overshadows all the absurdities in your libel, because the freshman knows that Gauss created his ISC precisely for linear dependences. Of course, you will never admit, the fact that it was me who managed to extend the MOC to the nonlinear domain and it, as a special case, absorbs Gauss's MOC.
Dear Yusuf!
Don't introduce unnecessary (yet) entities. Hteor or Cteor. I agree. but where does Y come from? it's sort of from another dimension)))
However, the model (as you put it) is wrong again, a0 is fixed and does not account for i (
I have every right to find out the dependence of any parameter on the last 4 historical prices and call it Y! Even, the degree of your persistence in not understanding the problem from the stated price values can be taken as Y and, then this dependence takes the form Y=a0, since there is no dependence of the degree of your persistence on the 4 historical prices. By this example I also showed you the role of coefficient a0 - it takes into account all unrecorded factors and must be present in all equations of this type to account for all unrecorded factors. If it happens so that calculation shows а0=0, we can conclude that Y is entirely dependent on the price of 4 bars. But this event is very unlikely, so it is almost always other than zero. There is no logical or mathematical contradiction to my taking the opening price of the current bar as Y. Nobody has the right to forbid me to do so for any reason whatsoever. You triumph that, a0 does not account for xi and put this fact as the main argument for the flaw in the model, not understanding that, it should be, because, a0 by definition should not account for xi, otherwise, what kind of a0 is it? If you don't understand the principles of equations you would not get involved in discussing correctness or imperfection of the model. You would have saved your face, but you have suffered a complete fiasco.
Mikhail Dovbakh, however, has drawn attention to this topic. Is there really something in it? Miracles...
For 13 years he worked at the Institute of Economics and Trade of the Tajik State University of Commerce as Associate Professor in the Department of Economics and Management in Enterprises, and for the last 5 years at the Mining and Metallurgy Institute of Tajikistan as Associate Professor in the Department of Mineral Deposit Processing. Is it forbidden to change jobs? It is not customary for us to flaunt one's academic degree and position where it is not required. And the fact that, indirectly, but deliberately, you suddenly compared the pages of a forum with a wall in a toilet, is the height of cynicism and blasphemy. Your astonishment "Where did the X's in the quads come from? ", is worthy of the highest praise in ignorance. when I showed that, Gauss originally proceeded from the assumption of minimising the sum of the squares of the difference of the unequal, that's where the inevitable appearance of the X's in quarts comes from. Even lazy to decipher the abbreviation MNC - method of least squares, which would have kept you from silly surprise with a question mark. And the exclamation "If linear, what ISC?" overshadows all the absurdities in your libel, because the freshman knows that Gauss created his ISC for linear dependences. Of course, you will never admit, the fact that I was the one who managed to extend the MNC to the nonlinear domain and it, as a special case, absorbs Gauss's MNC.
Here , looking at your authority, thoughtlessly began to solve the system of linear equations by MNC method))) Well at least it happened on the first of April, now I can blame it on an April Fool's joke. Why should I use ANC if the system is solved unambiguously and no approximation is needed? But of course if you find it out, it will appear that you solved the problem in another way, and not the one you're writing about here. And your main goal is to suck people's brains here.
It's the height of thought to suggest that someone here doesn't know what MNC is. Your statements about MNCs, on the other hand, make it very doubtful that you understand what it is.
It's not illegal to change jobs, but what does it have to do with her? What does it have to do with where you work? Do you have your college pin on your jacket yet? It's about time. Thought you'd gone into a lighter job like janitor or janitor... but no. I can only feel deeply sorry for your students.
Compared to the stories on the wall, that's where you're right. These things don't compare.
And here's the cherry on the cake, even to repeat the quote:
Of course, you will never admit, the fact that I am the one who managed to extend the MNC to the non-linear domain and it, as a special case, absorbs the Gaussian MNC.
There's a whole bouquet here at once: a demonstration that you don't know what MNC is and a demonstration of forbidden megalomania.
you are close to the sacred formulas of the universe ...
Thanks for the compliment, but, I managed to find formulas of such concepts as Past (P), Present (H) and Future (B), each of which, being a complex function of time and time image in Laplace transformations, describing corresponding, to their names or concepts events, follows one from another, and their sum, at any time, is equal to one, confirming the fact that, all of them are shares of one processhttps://www.mql5.com/ru/articles/250 , so that always P+H+B = 1.
I have every right to find out the dependence of any parameter on the last 4 historical prices and call it Y! Even, the degree of your persistence in not understanding the problem from the specified price values can be taken as Y and then this dependence takes the form of Y=a0, since there is no dependence of the degree of your persistence on the 4 historical prices. By this example I also showed you the role of coefficient a0 - it takes into account all unrecorded factors and must be present in all equations of this type to account for all unrecorded factors. If it happens so that calculation shows а0=0, we can conclude that Y is entirely dependent on the price of 4 bars. But this event is very unlikely, so it is almost always other than zero. There is no logical or mathematical contradiction to my taking the opening price of the current bar as Y. No one has the right to forbid me to do so for any reason. You triumph that, a0 does not account for xi and put this fact as the main argument for the flaw in the model, not understanding that, it should be, because, a0 by definition should not account for xi, otherwise, what kind of a0 is it? If you don't understand the principles of equations you would not get involved in discussing correctness or imperfection of the model. You would have saved your face but you failed completely.
You see, the degree of public "misunderstanding" is directly proportional to your inability to explain something. It may even be in a quadratic relationship.
Thanks for the compliment, but, I managed to find formulas of such concepts as Past (P), Present (H) and Future (B), each of which, being a complex function of time and time representation in Laplace transformations, describing events corresponding to their names or concepts, follows from one another, and their sum, at any moment of time, is equal to one, confirming the fact that they all are parts of a single processhttps://www.mql5.com/ru/articles/250 , so that always P+H+B = 1.
Oh))) heavy artillery rolls out - Laplace transformations))) But you seem to know them as well as transients and MOOCs...
Let it be known that time is not an attribute of Laplace transformations. You may as well bring time into the subject of any calculations and transformations...
...
Very nicely demonstrated that you don't even remotely know what Laplace transforms are))
...however - trying to use Laplace transformations to fuck with your brain is a pretty cool attempt.
Here, looking at your authority, I thoughtlessly began to solve the system of linear equations by the ISC method))) At least it happened on the first of April, now I can blame it on an April Fool's joke. Why should I use ANC if the system is solved unambiguously and no approximation is needed? But of course if you find it out, it will appear that you solved the problem in another way, and not the one you're writing about here. And your main goal is to suck people's brains here.
It's the height of thought to suggest that someone here doesn't know what MNC is. Your statements about MNCs, on the other hand, make it very doubtful that you understand what it is.
It's not illegal to change jobs, but what does it have to do with her? What does it have to do with where you work? Do you have your college pin on your jacket yet? It's about time. Thought you'd gone into a lighter job like janitor or janitor... but no. I can only feel deeply sorry for your students.
Compared to the stories on the wall, that's where you're right. These things don't compare.
And here's the cherry on top, I'll even repeat the quote:
There's a whole bunch here at once: a demonstration that you don't know what an MNC is and a demonstration of beyond megalomania.
Looking at yourshere, one can't help but regret that a chain of nonsense springs from your mouth and to argue with you is to disobey Mark Twain's admonition to do so.