Hi Chris,
I've no time for this stuff logically, but I can see cyclical activity ... you might find that a turn occurs every x days, but that the turn is either not there or too small to bother with 30-40% of the time say. Then you add a not unreasonable few days either side of the predicted date as nothing is perfect, throw in the difficulty of being sure it's a top or bottom (only when it starts to reverse will you be sure - that might already be too late) and you're imitating Christmas Turkeys again.
I'm happy cycles can be found, I don't think it's anything to do with planets or anytthing else like that - it's just that the underlying machinery hasn't been identified, possibly it's something we're simply not mentally equipped to understand yet (try teaching a caveman relativity, now throw in the distinct possibility that the Universe has either 11 or 26 dimensions and let me know how to figure out the distance between two points in 11 dimensional space....) It's entirely possible that things like planets just happen to move in such a way as to approximate the underlying mechanism, or are doing so for a while - pure coincidence could be all it is.
I think it's far more likely that time's running backwards and good traders are simply the small fraction of the population who can remember being older than that a ball of gas, floating 600 million km from the Sun, is doing anything other than helping stop Earth being hit by comets. (Which, admittedly, would probably affect the markets quite dramatically).
Astrology etc is barking up the wrong tree I'd say - if you have something that works, and it's down to reading tea leaves, then you need to dig deeper... how on earth will you know it doesn't work any more otherwise? You just KNOW that the day it stops working is the day you are getting deeper and deeper in the hole and becoming uncomfortable about the act of faith that is telling you it'll all turn back up shortly...
Dave
I've no time for this stuff logically, but I can see cyclical activity ... you might find that a turn occurs every x days, but that the turn is either not there or too small to bother with 30-40% of the time say. Then you add a not unreasonable few days either side of the predicted date as nothing is perfect, throw in the difficulty of being sure it's a top or bottom (only when it starts to reverse will you be sure - that might already be too late) and you're imitating Christmas Turkeys again.
I'm happy cycles can be found, I don't think it's anything to do with planets or anytthing else like that - it's just that the underlying machinery hasn't been identified, possibly it's something we're simply not mentally equipped to understand yet (try teaching a caveman relativity, now throw in the distinct possibility that the Universe has either 11 or 26 dimensions and let me know how to figure out the distance between two points in 11 dimensional space....) It's entirely possible that things like planets just happen to move in such a way as to approximate the underlying mechanism, or are doing so for a while - pure coincidence could be all it is.
I think it's far more likely that time's running backwards and good traders are simply the small fraction of the population who can remember being older than that a ball of gas, floating 600 million km from the Sun, is doing anything other than helping stop Earth being hit by comets. (Which, admittedly, would probably affect the markets quite dramatically).
Astrology etc is barking up the wrong tree I'd say - if you have something that works, and it's down to reading tea leaves, then you need to dig deeper... how on earth will you know it doesn't work any more otherwise? You just KNOW that the day it stops working is the day you are getting deeper and deeper in the hole and becoming uncomfortable about the act of faith that is telling you it'll all turn back up shortly...
Dave
TheBramble
Legendary member
- Messages
- 8,394
- Likes
- 1,170
It's one of them Dave.DaveJB said:
As soon as my sub-atomic particles started having colour, spin and charm I decided to look elsewhere for light relief.DaveJB said:
As an aside (and I don't think too many will believe this) I actually did get interested enough in Nuclear Physics to obtain an advanced degree in that as well. Brrrr...but managed to shake off all that useless learning some time ago. I'm now WAY beyond Tabula Rasa...I don't even have the Tabula any longer...
Dave, I keep telling you - I'm not interested. Tempt me any way you wish - but I will not marry anything that has a woolly coat and goes "Baa".DaveJB said:
TheBramble
Legendary member
- Messages
- 8,394
- Likes
- 1,170
It's all I use. But Uranus has a large part to play.chrisg said:
-oo0(GoldTrader)
Well-known member
- Messages
- 345
- Likes
- 5
George Angell
Hybrid Thread
If its just a beginners book that you want, try to find “Winning In The Future (or commodities) Markets by George Angell
• Paperback: 312 pages - search on • ISBN: 1557381461
Hybrid Thread
If its just a beginners book that you want, try to find “Winning In The Future (or commodities) Markets by George Angell
• Paperback: 312 pages - search on • ISBN: 1557381461
DaveJB said:but I think it's fair to say you'd be better off buying a simple TA book and reading that.
TheBramble
Legendary member
- Messages
- 8,394
- Likes
- 1,170
I urge you all to refrain from Googling either of these terms.chrisg said:
My problem with Nuclear Physics Tony,
or any other 'clever' bit of Physics is that I can't keep my face straight long enough during lessons, I start throwing in ideas like running into a 12ft shed with a 15ft ladder on your shoulder (do it fast enough and you can close the door behind you) ... the average 6th year pupil usually catches on when I describe the different particles/families - Leptons, Fermions, Hadrons, Bosons, Unclerons, Klingons....
...and if you are so intent on avoiding family membership why do you keep using the secret password?
(baaaa... secret handshake....)
or any other 'clever' bit of Physics is that I can't keep my face straight long enough during lessons, I start throwing in ideas like running into a 12ft shed with a 15ft ladder on your shoulder (do it fast enough and you can close the door behind you) ... the average 6th year pupil usually catches on when I describe the different particles/families - Leptons, Fermions, Hadrons, Bosons, Unclerons, Klingons....
...and if you are so intent on avoiding family membership why do you keep using the secret password?
(baaaa... secret handshake....)
TheBramble
Legendary member
- Messages
- 8,394
- Likes
- 1,170
Well, if it was a 12 foot BY 12 foot shed, with the door in one corner, you could easily run into it AND shut the door AND still have 1.9 feet to spare - without punching a ladder shape hole anywhere. And you can do that at walking pace in an Aristotelian/Euclidean Universe...DaveJB said:
It's not that I'm intent on avoiding family membership - it's just THAT side of the family...DaveJB said:
I didn't realise that was the secret handshake...
TheBramble
Legendary member
- Messages
- 8,394
- Likes
- 1,170
How TALL is the shed...?DaveJB said:
Too late Trendie,
I got a copy via email <g> Bramble, if you want to try balancing a 15ft ladder upright on your shoulder as you run at high speed then then you truly must be the man of steel, able to leap tall buidlings at a single bound, fearing nought save Kryptonite (And, in all likelihood, building site H&S inspectors). I shan't bother attempting to limit you further, as you will doubtless start escaping into additional dimensions.
I, meanwhile, will head the other way into flat land... as Eric Morecambe would have put it....
( 0-|-< ) Get out of that!
I got a copy via email <g> Bramble, if you want to try balancing a 15ft ladder upright on your shoulder as you run at high speed then then you truly must be the man of steel, able to leap tall buidlings at a single bound, fearing nought save Kryptonite (And, in all likelihood, building site H&S inspectors). I shan't bother attempting to limit you further, as you will doubtless start escaping into additional dimensions.
I, meanwhile, will head the other way into flat land... as Eric Morecambe would have put it....
( 0-|-< ) Get out of that!