|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
----- Original Message -----
From: "Research Dept." <research@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "Norman Winski" <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2001 12:15 AM
Subject: Re[2]: [RT] Validity of orbital element
> Hello Norman,
>
> NW> Ok, now that we know where the planets are, let's cut to the
> NW> chase. Are you going to post tests for correlations with plantary
> NW> cycles to the markets?
>
> I can not possibly post what does not exist, not to say that it never
> existed any less that our daily refuse "did exist once in time".
NW: Any Social Science 101 student knows that all one has to do is run a
correltion study and it will show whether and to what degree there is or is
not a correlation. You have decided the results without any testing. To
quote Sir Isaac Newton when criticized for his interest in Astrology, "I
have studied the subject sir, you have not".
I think this train has come to the end of the line.
Cheers,
Norman
>
> NW> Thanks,
> NW> Norman
>
> To further validate my authority upon this matter I submitted a
> completely mechanical trading model to various list that has to date
> worked very well. At least I know and admit that I am no great
> interpreter of some obscure and secretively reveled gann ramblings.
> No more that I am of chart reading or discretionary trading.
>
> How easy it would be for anyone who has an idea to simply program such
> into a mechanical system and test it for validity. Is this happening?
> I submit no, in general people want to have themselves held out as
> having some knowledge beyond that of their peers. I am also of that
> nature except to set the example let the cards fall where they may.
>
> I am not discounting any method more or less than another, what I
> demand from my own research is facts. Facts presented in hard black
> and white numbers. Those numbers could be read to me out loud if I
> were blind and would have the same meaning to me if I in fact did see
> them with my eyes. They are what they are, no I refuse to blur
> my eyes to see some after the fact correlation which will not endure.
>
> So if a set it and forget it method involved the planets then we would
> all know about it by now. Because that person who has it would own
> everything in the world by now, surely having discovered it long
> before our kings year 2001.
>
> Though I am convinced that planetary bodies have nothing to do with
> the financial markets. I should rectify any myths that the math used
> in such research is very interesting. Hyperbolic mathematical
> equations are in part those that I find fascinating
>
>
> Hyperbolic trigonometric functions are defined in terms of the natural
> exponential function ex.
>
> sinh(x):=[ex-e-x]/2
> cosh(x):=[ex+e-x]/2
> tanh(x):=sinh(x)/cosh(x)=[ex-e-x]/[ex+e-x]
> coth(x):=cosh(x)/sinh(x)=[ex+e-x]/[ex-e-x]
> sech(x):=1/cosh(x)=2/[ex+e-x]
> csch(x):=1/sinh(x)=2/[ex-e-x]
>
> Observe that sinh(x) and cosh(x) are the even and odd components of
> ex, by definition.
>
> The following equations relating sinh(x), cosh(x), and ex are special
> instances of equations relating even and odd parts of functions to the
> function itself:
>
> sinh(x)+cosh(x)=ex
> sinh(x)-cosh(x)=e-x
>
> Notation for powers and inverses of hyperbolic trigonometric functions
> is similar to that of trigonometric functions:
>
> cosh(cosh(x))!=cosh2(x)=cosh(x).cosh(x), but
> 1/cosh(x)!=cosh-1(x), and cosh-1(cosh(x))=1 for all real numbers x.
>
> Hyperbolic Pythagorean
>
> cosh2(x)-sinh2(x)=1
> 1-tanh2(x)=sech2(x)
> coth2(x)-1=csch2(x)
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Research mailto:research@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|