From theory to practice. Part 2 - page 151
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
All the traders will cry with envy and the brokers will laugh. ))))))
When they cry, you will write about "market rules and laws".
So far, 0.56% in 2 months.
When they cry, then you can write about the "rules and laws of the market".
So far, 0.56% in two months.
I am not competing with you or anyone else, just with the market.
I do not care about all the millionaires)))
It's important psychologically to work in the markets.
Envious people will never be successful.
I have learned to build 5 trends, trends from 12 years to 2 months, to each currency pair on the tips from the book of Eric Naiman, I picked up the right MA.
Probably have to build figures from several zigzag knees and look at the probabilities of their particular configurations. Intuition tells me ...
Intuition tells me that this is unnecessary fuss. If there was something there, the MoD with its canine flair would have detected it. Only the lazy one hasn't run the net or the forest in a zig-zag pattern.
What is there to discover if you don't know what you're looking for. It looks something like this - there is a stream of digits from a satellite with an encoded film. Making money in the market == understanding the meaning of the film. Without understanding the meaning, there is no way. No way at all. Just decoding it and putting it on the screen isn't even half the battle. And you're this stream of numbers and Hearst :))))
You just have to feed it to the codec, decompose it correctly by points on the screen, give each point the right colour at the right moment and synchronize everything in accordance with the code. To decode the sound using own codec, to convert it correctly into an analogue signal through the DAC, and then to listen to it for understanding.
Professional methodology is to take something and look for the differences from the SB. You may see "squares" in digital films, but there are "cracks" and stutters in the sound. These "differences from SB" on the market chart = "squares" and crackling when transmitting/receiving film from satellite. A lot of sense can be understood by analyzing these "differences" under smallscopes and with yadda integrals :)))) Or by Hirst's stream of digits? :))))
My intuition tells me that this is an unnecessary fuss. If there was something there, the MoD with its canine sense of smell would have detected it. Only the lazy one didn't run the net or the forest in a zig-zag.
No one is forcing anyone) Collective farming is voluntary)
What is there to discover if you don't know what you're looking for. It looks something like this - there is a stream of digits from a satellite with an encoded film. Making money in the market == understanding the meaning of the film. Without understanding the meaning, there is no way. No way at all. Just decoding it and putting it on the screen isn't even half the job. And you're this stream of numbers and Hearst :))))
You just have to feed it to the codec, decompose it correctly by points on the screen, give each point the right colour at the right moment and synchronize everything in accordance with the code. To decode the sound using own codec, to convert it correctly into an analogue signal through the DAC, and then to listen to it for understanding.
Professional methodology is to take something and look for the differences between it and SB. You may see "squares" in digital films, but there are "cracks" and stutters in the sound. These "differences from SB" on the market chart = "squares" and crackling when transmitting/receiving film from satellite. A lot of sense can be understood by analyzing these "differences" under smallscopes and with yadda integrals :)))) Or by Hirst's stream of digits? :))))
In my opinion, your analogy is fundamentally flawed. The more correct one is that we are trying to do something like what the SETI programme tried to do. They failed because they used amateur radio methods)
What is there to discover if you don't know what you're looking for. It looks something like this - there is a stream of digits from a satellite with an encoded film. Making money in the market == understanding the meaning of the film. Without understanding the meaning, there is no way. No way at all. Just decoding it and putting it on the screen isn't even half the job. And you're the stream of numbers and Hearst.
They failed because they used amateur radio techniques)
The methodology of professionals is to take something and look for differences from the SB. Digital movies have "squares" and sound has "crackles" and stutters. These "differences from SB" on the market chart = "squares" and crackling when transmitting/receiving film from the satellite.
This is called in human terms - market inefficiencies, those places where balance is disturbed, but not necessarily the price overlaps them, sometimes it does not (especially it concerns cryptocurrency). The behaviour of the market in relation to those places gives information about what to do and what not to do.
The woodcutter calls such places "sticks", to me they are just minima in the distribution of probabilities of the current movement, to someone it is a cluster of unidirectional extrema, to someone it is patterns, etc.
Everything is relative.
Only one thing is always true - the bigger the process, the more dimensions it captures, sort of like if you put a small magnet to a handful of coins, it only captures a small part as opposed to a much stronger magnet that captures most of the coins (dimensions) behind it.
But there is still a build-up of energy (market positions) before that, and even in the transmission of the same signal, in your example, energy has to be stored somewhere so that it can then be used for transmission, electricity in a battery, information in memory.
That's what I was talking about earlier, in the accumulation of energy there is complete chaos, in the distribution there is complete order, only when order is too late to come in, and when accumulation is unclear when (I guess). But you can't have it any other way, otherwise you are assured of failure. It turns out that the trader essentially doomed to look stupidly under the feet understanding what is happening at a microscopic level, and not even trying to anticipate the market, but only act strictly by the current situation, and for those who try to predict the future (of course they will never succeed) it seems as if he predicts it... hmmm... again, it is a paradox...
One more interesting moment, when creating an algorithm for market recognition, for some reason the number three always prevails, three time intervals to determine the situation on the market, also it needs only three extrema, also according to statistics only three statistically significant levels, ... Maybe it all seems like nails to me of course... But I tried to keep the hammer away from me to be as objective as possible)