Charles Dow's theory - page 30
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
Yousufkhodja Sultonov:
there is only jealousy and revealing inner resentment and anger that why he and not I made such a brave move!
There is no envy or resentment. Do not project your condition onto others.
...
And the point is that, briefly, Gauss, having invented the method of least squares 200 years ago, became the sole leader in the field of processing factual material of results of scientific works in all areas of science and industry, before the appearance of my article. Gauss's famous and popular work, covered only the linear domain of dependencies but, and this was immensely welcomed by researchers including Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein and all scientists of then and now. It is bribed by the simplicity of its ideas and its equally obvious execution, as Babayan says in his speeches, achieved "an unbeatable result" according to Gauss and the rest of the scientific community.
And suddenly, on February, 7th, 2011, there will be a thunderbolt from a clear sky, far leaving behind Gauss's efforts and considering his Method of Least Squares as a special case of a more general dependence in the form of PNB!
Perhaps you should at least familiarise yourself with the history of the development of ISC? Then it would become clear to you how far from reality these claims of yours are.
https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/metod-naimenshih-kvadratov-istoriya-i-razvitie/viewer
However, you could have read about it in WIKI as well:
"History.
Until the beginning of XIX century, scientists had no precise rules for solution of a system of equations with less unknowns than the number of equations. Up to that time, piecemeal procedures depending on the type of the equations and on the wit of calculators were used, and therefore different calculators, based on the same observational data, came to different conclusions. Gauss (1795) was the first to use the method, but Legendre (1805) independently discovered and published it under the modern name(Méthode des moindres quarrés) [1]. Laplace related the method to probability theory, and the American mathematician Edraine (1808) considered its probability-theoretic applications [2]. The method was extended and improved by further investigations by Encke, Bessel, Hanzen and others.
A. A. Markov's works in the beginning of XX century have allowed to include the method of the least squares in the theory of estimation of mathematical statistics in which it is the important and natural part. The efforts of J. Neumann, F. David, A. Aitken, and S. Rao have yielded many important results in this area [3]."
Maybe you should have a little knowledge of the history of the development of the ISC. Then it would be clear to you how far from reality these claims of yours are.
https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/metod-naimenshih-kvadratov-istoriya-i-razvitie/viewer
However, you could have read about it in WIKI as well:
"History.
Until the beginning of XIX century, scientists had no precise rules for solution of a system of equations with less unknowns than the number of equations. Up to that time, piecemeal procedures depending on the type of the equations and on the wit of calculators were used, and therefore different calculators, based on the same observational data, came to different conclusions. Gauss (1795) was the first to use the method, but Legendre (1805) independently discovered and published it under the modern name(Méthode des moindres quarrés) [1]. Laplace related the method to probability theory, and the American mathematician Edraine (1808) considered its probability-theoretic applications [2]. The method was extended and improved by further investigations by Encke, Bessel, Hanzen and others.
A. A. Markov's works in the beginning of XX century have allowed to include the method of the least squares in the theory of estimation of mathematical statistics in which it is the important and natural part. The efforts of J. Neumann, F. David, A. Aitken, and S. Rao have yielded many important results in this area [3]."
Perhaps you should have a little knowledge of the history of the development of the ISC. Then it would be clear to you how far from reality these claims of yours are.
https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/metod-naimenshih-kvadratov-istoriya-i-razvitie/viewer
However, you could have read about it in WIKI as well:
"History.
Until the beginning of XIX century, scientists had no precise rules for solution of a system of equations with less unknowns than the number of equations. Up to that time, piecemeal procedures depending on the type of the equations and on the wit of calculators were used, and therefore different calculators, based on the same observation data, came to different conclusions. Gauss (1795) was the first to use the method, but Legendre (1805) independently discovered and published it under the modern name(Méthode des moindres quarrés) [1]. Laplace related the method to probability theory, and the American mathematician Edraine (1808) considered its probability-theoretic applications [2]. The method was extended and improved by further investigations by Encke, Bessel, Hanzen and others.
A. A. Markov's works in the beginning of XX century have allowed to include the method of the least squares in the theory of estimation of mathematical statistics in which it is the important and natural part. The efforts of J. Neumann, F. David, A. Aitken, S. Rao have yielded many important results in this area [3]."
Dear Vladimir, well, what, essential, difference did you see in my explanations of ISC on a page of popular site MKL5https://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/359299/page27#comment_20065708 from those which are known in professional literature on this question, which you quote? Except that I did not point to two more authors of ANMs, LeGendre and Laplace and other mathematicians who improved ANM estimation and developed the theory of estimation of mathematical statistics. They are included in the collective image of Gauss and everyone can find them in professional literature, if necessary. What other missteps have you "noticed"? Aren't you ashamed of trying to defame me for something I didn't do? Do you have something to say on the essence of the matter in question? If not, stop pressuring your psyche! For your information, the EOR were already successfully applied in geology in the study of the problem of drainage of gas deposits in Tyumen by my pupil and an invention application was filed, a thesis for a candidate's degree in geology and mineralogy was defended. PNB made a breakthrough in the field of radiography by assigning to each mineral a characteristic equation in the form of a B-function peculiar only to that mineral, sparing geologists the need to regularly use the cartography published in the USA. It proved validity of Ohm's law that had no theoretical substantiation; it eliminated all coefficients in studies of problems of reliability and capacity of power high-voltage transformers; it determined exactly the dependence of heat capacity of materials on temperature with an astonishing accuracy of 0.035% instead of 12% analogously. And this precision of the measuring equipment itself, and the accuracy of the PNB becomes absolute! PNB has unequivocally found the dependence of gold leaching from ores of Khishtkhona deposit in Zerafshan valley, by heap method, but by sodium cyanide solution, without using ore beneficiation processes. The experiment proved to be fundamentally possible to extract 92% of gold, although the experiments were terminated when 61% gold was extracted from poor ore containing only 0.05 g/t gold and which could not be processed using known technologies. Would you like me to go on with more examples on the effectiveness of EOR?
Who are you saying that to? Well, the man broke his back on forex, he's understandable.
You be quiet, defender of the opponents!
In my opinion you are wasting your time and emotions. The man is clearly schizophrenic. Words online won't help him any more. He should be taken to an off-line doctor. I think most of the reasonable people on this forum understand that.
That's the first thing that popped into my head when I saw this thread. And even the facet of the nonsense is obvious - the nonsense of invention.
But then I thought, maybe it's a mismatch of socio-cultural tones. Maybe in his cultural environment it is customary to PR himself.
Maybe the man needs to be told that here he gives the impression of being insane.
But if the symptoms persist, you are right.
Wait for Iurii Tokman
He has upgraded the EA and possibly the indicator.
I did not touch the indicator, as it is
I tried different variants with the Expert Advisor
as soon as the market goes sideways - balance goes down
closing on flips fixes a lot of losses