Experiment - page 44

[Yousufkhodja Sultonov]

Volodymyr Zubov:

Yusuf, how is your theory different from MA ? Ma has trend and acceleration, do you have acceleration ?

Vladimir, PNB theory is fundamentally different from MA and all other indicators. Suffice it to comprehend the meaning of PNB is a chain of three functions of nature, respectively the functions of the Past (P), Present (P) and Future (F) times, interrelated in such a way that the identical condition of P+H++B =1 is always fulfilled. In this chain, the main and defining function is H. The remaining P and B functions are derived exactly from the H function by integration. The PNB has 3 variables, 1 argument and 2 coefficients, which are uniquely determined from the H function by the method of least squares. Without exception, all processes in nature are described by these UPE functions by varying the variables, so that no process equation repeats another one. We see that the process of trade is not an exception. EOFs accurately describe , within a given sample of historical data, and accurately predict future price behavior with some non-critical fluctuation. In short. In PNB theory, you can also determine the speed and acceleration of price movements, if necessary.

PS: I ask everyone to master this definition of the PNB abbreviation.

[Maxim Kuznetsov]

in short, removing all philosophy - MA is the product of a vector of weights on a vector of prices, PNB is the product of a matrix on the same vector of prices

weight coefficients of MA are known and clear, therefore they may be varied

the elements of the matrix PNB are incomprehensible even to the author, so they are true :-)

[CHINGIZ MUSTAFAEV]

Yousufkhodja Sultonov:

Vladimir, the PNB theory is fundamentally different from MA and all other indicators. Suffice it to comprehend the meaning of PNB is a chain of three functions of nature, respectively, the functions of the Past (P), Present (P) and Future (F) times, interrelated so that the identical condition P+H++B =1 is always fulfilled. In this chain, the main and defining function is H. The remaining P and B functions are derived exactly from the H function by integration. The PNB has 3 variables, 1 argument and 2 coefficients, which are uniquely determined from the H function by the method of least squares. Without exception, all processes in nature are described by these UPE functions by varying the variables, so that no process equation repeats another one. We see that the process of trade is not an exception. EOFs accurately describe , within a given sample of historical data, and accurately predict future price behavior with some non-critical fluctuation. In short. In PNB theory you can also determine the speed and acceleration of price movements, if necessary.

PS: I ask everyone to master this definition of the PNB abbreviation.

Please try to give us a link, where you describe where and how P+H+B=1.

Otherwise what you write does not differ from a scientific tautology of olega avtomata, which also very and very clever, and very much knows and understands a lot, but key facts on which in fact all his project depends, he takes simply from a ceiling by a method of scientific poking.

If you do not understand the key issues for themselves, what can you say, well, just a disrespect to himself, to his work ...

Well, if you do not want (most likely) to understand anything, it seems with the aforementioned clever man you will find a lot in common, and you communicate with him will be much more interesting than with us. But it seems to me that even he won't interact with you in that way...

I'm just trying to understand what's so unique about PNB, apart from your arrogance.

And I think a lot of people would like to know too.

It is of course strange for me to say this to an entire PhD, but you should know Yusuf that everything in mathematics is built on proofs and axioms, without that mathematics would not be mathematics.

An axiom must reflect an unambiguous unambiguous solution to the problem presented, it must be the truth in the last instance. In your case, it is a proof that P+H+B within any considered sample equals 1 and not 1.5, 0.7, 2.5, namely 1. And most importantly, describe what this unit is where it comes from in general. Why it is not equal to three, for instance. That works too, doesn't it?

I can tell you that you are wrong that P+H+B = 3 in fact and here try to disprove my statement)

Otherwise here every lazy person can rant that PNB is not one and anything and will be right, as well as those who assert that UFOs exist, or that around the sun flies electric kettle with a mind. These are all the same category of claims, on a par with your theory so far.

And anyway, what makes you think your PNB predicts anything with "minor fluctuations"? It just reacts to current changes within the sample, that's all it does. It can't even describe price data properly. As Eugene has shown you many times before.

[Yousufkhodja Sultonov]

CHINGIZ MUSTAFAEV:
Please try to give us a link, where you could describe where and how P+H+B=1.

Otherwise what you write does not differ from scientific tautology olega avtomata which too very and very clever, and very much knows, in many respects understands, but key facts on which in fact all his project depends simply takes from a ceiling by a method of scientific groping.

If you do not understand the key issues for themselves, what can you say, well, just a disrespect to himself, to his work ...

Well, if you do not want (most likely) to understand anything, it seems with the aforementioned clever man you will find a lot in common, and you communicate with him will be much more interesting than with us. But it seems to me that even he won't interact with you in that way...

I'm just trying to understand what's so unique about PNB, apart from your arrogance.

And I think a lot of people would like to know too.

It is of course strange for me to say this to an entire PhD, but you should know Yusuf that everything in mathematics is built on proofs and axioms, without that mathematics would not be mathematics.

An axiom must reflect an unambiguous unambiguous solution to the problem presented, it must be the truth in the last instance. In your case, it is a proof that P+H+B within any considered sample equals 1 and not 1.5, 0.7, 2.5, namely 1. And most importantly, describe what this unit is where it comes from in general. Why it is not equal to three, for instance. That works too, doesn't it?

I can tell you that you are wrong that P+H+B = 3 in fact and here try to disprove my statement)

Otherwise every lazy person here can rant that PNB is not one but anything and will be right, just as those who claim that UFOs exist or that there is an electric kettle with intelligence flying around the sun are right. These are all the same category of claims, along with your theory so far.

And what makes you think your PNB predicts anything with "minor fluctuations" anyway? It just reacts to current changes within the sample, that's all it does. It can't even describe price data properly. As Eugene showed you many times before.

Seehttps://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/359299,https://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/358795/page12#comment_19949258

[CHINGIZ MUSTAFAEV]

Yousufkhodja Sultonov:

Seehttps://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/359299

I've already read that, I thought you'd come up with your own... You know what it is.

Yes very pretty words, but nothing, I mean nothing at all in terms of statistics. If predictions, what percentage of predictions come true and what percentage don't.

Is there anything at all besides your words? Or are you suggesting that all readers just take your word for it?

"Dow's prophecy that "price takes into account everything", being only a guess, under the pressure of hard facts, is recognized as an axiom, but miraculously. has received its theoretical confirmation and one can and should enter this Dow axiom into the category of proven axioms and henceforth call it the Dow Theorem!"

Don't you think that's a bit much?)

[Yousufkhodja Sultonov]

The NZD/JPY is closed BAY and open SELL.

[Evgeniy Chumakov]

CHINGIZ MUSTAFAEV:

Don't you think that's a bit too much?)

Yusuf has now hit a lucky phase and is still profitable. He is wearing rose-coloured glasses at the moment, no not rose-coloured - welding safety glasses in general.

But the sample of 300 days (you know what I mean)

[CHINGIZ MUSTAFAEV]

Evgeniy Chumakov:

Yusuf has now hit a lucky phase and is still profiting. He is wearing rose-coloured glasses at the moment, no not rose-coloured - welding safety glasses in general.

But the sample of 300 days (you know what I mean).

I completely agree with you.

I will be glad if you put something interesting in their research nnb, if there is anything at all, of course)

I will send you the indicator archive where you may change the sampling that Yusuf showed in another thread long time ago. Because you're the only one I know who could make sense of all this nonsense and do some research about it ...

You may come in handy).

[Evgeniy Chumakov]

CHINGIZ MUSTAFAEV:

I will send you the archive of the indicator in which you could change the sampling, which Yusuf showed in another thread a long time ago.

I have a self-written indicator based on his Excel file. I have checked all calculations on each step to make sure it has no errors. I also fixed critical moments with help of Yusuf (when it was calculated in Excel but there were errors in the application).

By the way the T parameter should be taken in absolute value, otherwise it may become negative and result in a horizontal straight line.

In conclusion I will say that the indicator has not showed profit in its usual form (I doubt that I am doing something wrong, as I have known about this case for a long time).

Now I'm testing the indicator with a different approach:

The red and blue lines are NBP for the price. As you can see in the picture, at this point, there is a contradiction in the signal.

[Maxim Kuznetsov]

Yousufkhodja Sultonov:

SELL on EUR/NZD was closed and BAY was opened. See how this happens:

Equity over balance exceeded $2. It was predicted to fall. Equity and balance will rise steadily..:

not to wishful thinking,

there's a great thing in the terminal called a "report".

open the history tab, right-click and choose "report, save as html" from the drop-down menu

scroll down the page and see the sad truth

because the "experiment" has been running for a long time,

you should limit the history depth to a reasonable value. For example, a month. Or a quarter. The period of time we sum up the results and withdraw the money

on the forum (in kodobase/market or just ask around) there are more advanced "reporters"

PS/ the screenshots are of a clean coin (undermined robot) during debugging on a demo. The performance of a successful algorithm should be much better