Now that's FUNNY!!
d
> -----Original Message-----
> From: amibroker@xxxxxxxxxps.com
> [mailto:amibroker@xxxxxxxxxps.com]
On Behalf Of Dennis Brown
> Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2008 2:10 PM
> To: amibroker@xxxxxxxxxps.com
> Subject: Re: [amibroker] Re: Philosophical question -->
> Breakouts or Moving averages?
>
> Brian,
>
> On which forum do you discuss philosophical topics?
>
> BR,
> Dennis
>
> On Mar 23, 2008, at 7:34 AM, brian_z111 wrote:
> > I stuck my neck out, by going OT on the philosophical aspect, for
> > Ron, who has shown a kind disposition towards me in the past (I also
> > owe everything to my constituency "who I live for").
> >
> > Anyone who searches Wikipedia for "holism",
"hologram"
> > and "correspondence(s)", for example, will find amble
examples
> > (soundbites) on either a philosphical or mundane (trading)
> level, and
> > very good examples at that.
> >
> > I am not going to go any further on the philosophcial expostion in
> > this forum though.
> >
> >> Hmm... From a practical point of view, how would you apply this
> >> philosophical reflexion to trading?
> >
> > The discounted value of future earnings to PV is the
> rational market.
> >
> > The skewed market is the irrational market.
> >
> > This is how the unversal reality of dualism plays out in this sphere
> > of human activity.
> >
> >> I mean: if I want to trade hourly, should I concentrate on
> >> breakouts or
> >> moving averages in your opinion?
> >
> > In modern western culture we are very direct.
> > In some cultures, rather than offend, they will give an evasive
> > answer rather than tell someone they are wrong.
> >
> > In my case, an evasive answer means "think a bit further on the
> > subject".
> >
> > brian_z
> >
> >
> > --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxps.com,
"Louis Préfontaine"
> > <rockprog80@...> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Hmm... From a practical point of view, how would you apply this
> >> philosophical reflexion to trading?
> >>
> >> I mean: if I want to trade hourly, should I concentrate on
> > breakouts or
> >> moving averages in your opinion?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Louis
> >>
> >> 2008/3/21, brian_z111 <brian_z111@...>:
> >>>
> >>> (Subjective) investigations into the 'human condition' have
been
> >>> going on, in parallel with our search for objective truths,
as
> > long
> >>> as humanity has been around.
> >>>
> >>> This body of information has been collected and preserved, by
the
> >>> few, for the benefit of mankind (the many) and consitutes a
> > SCIENCE
> >>> to its guardians, adherents and students.
> >>>
> >>> From that body of WISDOM two principles can be extracted that
are
> >>> relevant to your comments:
> >>>
> >>> holism is universally persistent (all things are made in the
> > IMAGE of
> >>> the creator)
> >>>
> >>> and,
> >>>
> >>> flowing from that, we derive the principle of CORRESPONDENCE
> >>> (operating principles in one sphere, have their corresponding
> >>> principle in another)...
> >>>
> >>> ...but that is going to far OT.
> >>>
> >>> Over to trading (OR how the above relates to trading):
> >>>
> >>> Over the long term the bias of the (stock) market is a
function of
> >>> the earnings performance of the component companies.
> >>>
> >>> This is skewed by the behaviour of market participants, which
> >>> introduces randomness to the markets.
> >>>
> >>> The shorter the timeframe the more dominant is 'randomness'
> > (which of
> >>> course is not true randomness).
> >>>
> >>> (If you are interested in the subject of organising
principles and
> >>> holism Carl Jung's work on Psychological Archetypes is a
wonderful
> >>> example of how the universal paradigms play out in the
affairs of
> >>> wo/mankind).
> >>>
> >>> brian_z *:-)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxps.com
<amibroker%
> > 40yahoogroups.com>, "Ronald
> >>> Davis"
<xokie7@> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> I maintain the view that algorithms exist in nature, and
that
> >>> people who develop algorighms are only discovering another
one of
> >>> nature's secrets.
> >>>>
> >>>> When my son first showed me Amibroker several years ago,
I
> > looked
> >>> at charts with Stochastics, and RSI, and I became convinced
that
> >>> mother nature has algorithms that can find the central core
of
> > all of
> >>> that volatility.
> >>>>
> >>>> I have yet to discover mother nature's algorighms, but my
> > attempts
> >>> have led me to some conclusions.
> >>>>
> >>>> ----------------------------------------------------------
> >>> ----------------------------------------------------------
> >>> ------
> >>>>
> >>>> My results WERE BEST when I "AVERAGED THE LAST
SEVERAL HUNDRED
> > DAYS
> >>> OF ACTIVITY"
> >>>>
> >>>> and watched the LAST 9 DAYS>of the performance of this
average
> > of
> >>> hundreds of days.
> >>>>
> >>>> ----------------------------------------------------------
> >>> ----------------------------------------------------------
> >>> ------
> >>>>
> >>>> My results WERE LESS GOOD when I "AVERAGED OF LAST 9
DAYS OF
> >>> ACTIVITY"
> >>>>
> >>>> and watched the LAST 9 DAYS>of the performance of this
average
> > of
> >>> only 9 days.
> >>>>
> >>>> ----------------------------------------------------------
> >>> ----------------------------------------------------------
> >>> -----
> >>>>
> >>>> Hope this helps someone. Ron D
> >>>>
> >>>> ----------------------------------------------------------
> >>> ----------------------------
> >>>>
> >>>> ----- Original Message -----
> >>>> From: Louis Préfontaine
> >>>> To: amibroker@xxxxxxxxxps.com
<amibroker%40yahoogroups.com>
> >>>> Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2008 10:25 PM
> >>>> Subject: [amibroker] Philosophical question
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi group,
> >>>>
> >>>> I just began reading Howard Bandy's book (even though I
did not
> >>> finish Aronson's book yet...), and a somehow philosophical
> > question
> >>> came to my mind when he speaks about the market's
inefficiency and
> >>> how we must take advantage of it. He talks both about moving
> >>> averages and breakout, and I was wondering which one of the
two
> >>> techniques do you think is the more promising for such a
system?
> >>>>
> >>>> I ask this because as far as subjective technical
analysis is
> >>> concerned, I am more used with breakout techniques. But the
real
> >>> inefficiency in breakout techniques comes from time, that is
if
> > one
> >>> can act quickly enough to make a profit from the sudden
change in
> >>> price. But from my experience it seems to be more difficult
with
> > EOD
> >>> or hourly data. And it is less profitable for someone (like
me)
> > who
> >>> is using options, which tend to anticipate the change quicker
> > than it
> >>> really happens.
> >>>>
> >>>> Moving averages techniques, on the other side, seems a
bit
> >>> mystical to me, and maybe a bit too simple or too « easy ». I
> > don't
> >>> know much about them...
> >>>>
> >>>> But anyway, my question is: which one of those two
techniques do
> >>> you prefer, or do you use both for entering a trade, or
shorting a
> >>> trade? What can be a good way to trade for someone (like me)
who
> >>> wants to trade hourly data and can't always get the beginning
of a
> >>> breakout?
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks!
> >>>>
> >>>> Louis
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Please note that this group is for discussion between users only.
> >
> > To get support from AmiBroker please send an e-mail directly to
> > SUPPORT {at} amibroker.com
> >
> > For NEW RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENTS and other news always check DEVLOG:
> > http://www.amibroker.com/devlog/
> >
> > For other support material please check also:
> > http://www.amibroker.com/support.html
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Please note that this group is for discussion between users only.
>
> To get support from AmiBroker please send an e-mail directly to
> SUPPORT {at} amibroker.com
>
> For NEW RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENTS and other news always check DEVLOG:
> http://www.amibroker.com/devlog/
>
> For other support material please check also:
> http://www.amibroker.com/support.html
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>