From theory to practice. Part 2 - page 123
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
Apparently, you do not understand at all the meaning and essence of the Hearst index H = H(N), which characterizes the fractal dimension of the time series in question.
To state that"there is noHearst, there is no money" is to sign your own incompetence.
Here is an article for your perusal, study it carefully and thoughtfully:http://www.mathnet.ru/links/6675a7582e4104aa6a5d921061ab1127/sjim394.pdf
There is literature on the subject, and if you make the effort, you can deepen your knowledge in this area.
So far, your fixation on "Hearst" has been observed. Probably because you really like the sound of that word.
Oleg, you've disappointed me. There's nothing new or interesting there.
I don't think you've read it yourself. Otherwise you wouldn't be talking outright nonsense here.
Oleg, you have disappointed me. There's nothing new or interesting there.
I don't think you've read it yourself. Otherwise you wouldn't be talking outright nonsense.
Oh, man.
Why are you reading this nonsense?
rationing is a million times easier and what's Hearst got to do with it? ;).
1. We remember the price at any given time.
2. We divide it by what we've memorized.
that's it.
all concerned!
Thank you, Oleg. I'll read it. By the way, I count it just through the fractal dimension.
As for the"noHearst no money" statement, that's not mine. Those are Nobel laureates. Illiterate people, apparently.
The Nobel committee discredited itself long ago.
Nobel laureates in economics have been talking outright nonsense for a long time.
Nobel Peace Laureates have been starting wars.
Not all that glitters is gold.
The Nobel Committee has long been discredited.
Nobel laureates in economics have long been talking outright nonsense.
Nobel Peace laureates are waging wars.
Not all that glitters is gold.
+++
the public link - it only shows what the monitor author has allowed to be shown
Oleg, you have disappointed me. There's nothing new or interesting there.
I don't think you've read it yourself. Otherwise you wouldn't be talking nonsense here.
I repeat: read it carefully!
There is nothing new there. This article is from 2002.
But a careful reading of it may open your eyes.
I repeat: read it carefully!
There is nothing new there. It is an article from 2002.
But reading it carefully may open your eyes.
Have you read it yourself? If you have, specify the place in the article that should enlighten me.
Have you read it yourself? If so, please specify the place in the article that should enlighten me.
And ask yourself what this indicator measures, what are its properties, area of applicability, margin of error, dependence on sample size, reliability, etc. etc.
Applying this indicator to financial series is like putting a pot on your head.
You can find pictures of potheads online.Lop Doc doesn't yet know that a series with a variable Hearst easily reduces to a series with a variable intensity flow of events. This he will never understand....
Lop Doc doesn't yet know that a series with variable Hearst can easily be reduced to a series with variable intensity of event flow. This he will never understand....
Let's wish him: Doctor heal thyself!