The NSP and the paradoxes of nature - page 46

[Renat Akhtyamov]

Vladimir Baskakov:
Minus is yours, you don't even have to show screens.

That's who I'm having fun chatting with....

I don't need...

I don't need the signals.

I just got off the phone today.

I solved two more problems:

- when to pick up the tail.

no solved yet.

- when to pick up

[[Deleted]]

Renat Akhtyamov:

That's who I'm having fun chatting with....

I don't need...

I don't need the signals.

You just want to talk about everything and nothing.

[Renat Akhtyamov]

Vladimir Baskakov:
You just want to talk about everything and nothing.

You know, I don't give a shit.

you're going to fold no matter how much you take.

Now read the above in detail, every letter, cause there's no other way.

You got the mystery of the triangle figured out, or are you still cool?

the fucking mystery... )))))

?

ahahahahaha!

new-rena

[CHINGIZ MUSTAFAEV]

Renat Akhtyamov:

uncle...

look - that's how they pour

figure out - why and try (try!!!) not to do as THEY do

Are you talking about reptiloids or what?:₽

I have everything I need))

I just promised to take apart Yusuf's code and show what he can and that's all, well just a few lines of code and a couple of half-kitschy crammed in there.

But I know exactly what and how you do - well, pretty boy, you may have solved one of the mysteries, and I think you've even solved something that I don't know about the interdependence of currency pairs (it may be about a triangle).

Be modest, because your "new rena" and "it won't be any other way" threads are popping up in a lot of forum threads:₽

[[Deleted]]

Renat Akhtyamov:

You know, I don't give a shit.

you're going to fold no matter how much or how little you take.

Now read the above in detail, every letter, cause there's no other way.

You got the mystery of the triangle figured out, or are you still cool?

the mystery, fuck... )))))

?

ahahahahaha!

new-rena

It's not the triangle that's the mystery, it's not

[Fast235]

Renat Akhtyamov

I won't forget a phrase someone wrote here almost a year ago, like - out of desperation,

take a break, reconsider everything.

[Yousufkhodja Sultonov]

Nikolai Semko:
Congratulations to you Yusuf!

To endure 10 years of mockery and non-recognition without losing your enthusiasm is really cool!

I wish you to write the same message 10 years from now, standing with one foot on a broken forex spine.

Thank you, Nicholas! Along with mockery and non-recognition, I have received an incomparably greater moral satisfaction during those 10 years. I am recognised by posterity, it's not a problem. The main thing is that I have solved the global problem of finding the regularities of any number series, if they are present. As an example, I will give the regularity of the sum of prime numbers of a natural number. The pattern does not have, or rather did not have, a formula. Many great mathematicians have tackled this problem in vain, including Euler. PNB has solved this problem in his own way, by proposing a formula for producing prime numbers of a natural series with the smallest error and finding an absolutely exact sum of all prime numbers in the sample! I will illustrate this fact with an example of all prime numbers up to 100. In this sample of only 25 prime numbers, which the PNB described with an accuracy of 3.29%:

Here are the prime numbers themselves and their estimated values:

Y	Y calculated.
2 ,00000	2 ,00000
3 ,00000	3 ,17777
5 ,00000	5 ,09849
7 ,00000	7 ,44975
11,00000	10,12850
13,00000	13,07684
17,00000	16,25635
19,00000	19,63917
23,00000	23,20388
29,00000	26,93336
31,00000	30,81351
37,00000	34,83244
41,00000	38,97997
43,00000	43,24724
47,00000	47,62643
53,00000	52,11061
59,00000	56,69355
61,00000	61,36961
67,00000	66,13368
71,00000	70,98106
73,00000	75,90745
79,00000	80,90886
83,00000	85,98161
89,00000	91,12226
97,00000	96,32761
1 060,00000	1 060,00000

[denis.eremin]

Yousufkhodja Sultonov:

Do you have any idea what "3.29% accuracy" means?

[Yousufkhodja Sultonov]

denis.eremin:

Do you have any idea what "3.29% accuracy" means?

It is the RMS, the fluctuation around the exact regression line. It is the charge for assuming a difference instead of a differential, as stated in the articlehttps://www.mql5.com/ru/articles/250

Who gave you permission to "poke"?

[Fast235]

3% is inflation over 5 years in prudent countries)