|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Jim,
Are you really comparing apples to apples? Shouldn't there be a study to show 22.1 years from the 1929 start date and see what that brought? Wouldn't that be a clue for this 87 to 09 study? Just asking. If there isn't can you explain why?
Thanks,
Brad
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Ross" <jrosscpa@xxxxxxx>
To: realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Saturday, October 17, 2009 11:20:50 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific
Subject: RE: [RT] Failure of studies/patterns
Here are the numbers, simply add the F25 interval in days to the 1987 dates:
http://www.screencast.com/users/Virginia_Jim/folders/Jing/media/2ce6c5be-5a5e-4ddf-9479-60d89be7e2d1
Here’s the implied analog in chart form:
http://www.screencast.com/users/Virginia_Jim/folders/Jing/media/69b40183-b3b1-421e-ae54-1e6a3146af65
Some interesting “coincidents"
1. The interval from 1987 to 2009 or 22.1 years divided by the interval from 1929 to 1987 or 58.0 years equals .381 (a near perfect Fib number).
2. July 11 is the computed date and July 10 was a significant low not the lowest low. The “spring lows” in 1929 and 1987 were not the lows to date of those years either.
3. October 16 is the computed date and October 15 is, TENTATIVELY, a ‘hit’ given the +- one day (any projection cannot be more accurate than its measurement period).
There are two criticisms I have made of this “speculation”. First, that the dates are occurring one moon later in relation to the spring equinox than 1929 or 1987. My belief is Carolan made his discovery in relation to the equinox but broadened it to the Fibonacci spiral counted in lunar periods. I believe the reference to the equinox is not the computation but a coincidence; that the real computation is all Fibonacci. Second, that crashes as documented by Stephen Puetz, Chris Carolan and Peter Eliades occur in either a spring or fall season. Well, December 10 is not in that season. My thinking on that is that the first wave defined by the dates, namely after the final high of October 16 and before the secondary high of November 23 will be a large enough wave in its own right to be considered a crash. In 1929 and 1987 that same first wave was 10% and 17% respectively. If this is, as Ellioticians say, intermediate 1 of primary 3 of cycle c, the next three weeks could be historic. And December 10 could, in its own right, be a crash. But it would be considered simply a continuation of the first wave.
Those above are my self criticisms and rationalizations. Yours is the seasons in which these dates occur. It boils down to one extra lunar cycle. Like the extra moon in the computation, the whole thing is shifted one lunar interval relative to 1929 or 1987. But it otherwise is the same number of days between the dates. And my RATIONALIZATION is that it not the season of the year or the equinox as the reference point…..it a Fibonacci computation in lunar intervals.
The character of 1929 was quite different from 1987. In 1929 there were a series of huge down days and the nation went into a decade depression. In 1987 it was largely a one and done and the nation recovered quickly. I fully expect this time will be different as well.
Hey, its all numerology, no plausibly sustainable causality and the rationalization I’ve read is too elaborate to try to recount. If the October 15 high holds, I’d say it’s probability of fulfillment would convince me I don’t want to be long. If I gave you those dates 8 months ago, I’d say the probability is 1 in infinity against their implication.
Good luck,
Jim
From: realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jim White
Sent: Saturday, October 17, 2009 11:22 AM
To: realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [RT] Failure of studies/patterns
Help me with this - I am not a spiral calendar expert.
Carolyn's correlation of 4 dates was spring low, summer high, fall high and crash date. The distance between 20 and 87 dates 717 moons. How do you come up with a correlation for 2009?
Also spring low this year was 3/6
If there is a correlation, shouldn't the next date be a fall high followed by a crash?
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, October 17, 2009 6:05 AM
Subject: RE: [RT] Failure of studies/patterns
M Syed, I appreciate your insights and sharing.
Here’s a pattern for you. I first posted this speculation on Slope of Hope, markettimers@xxxxxxxxxxx, yelnick, spiritoftruth on September 25. I call it the Sirial Calendar 1929-1987 analogy. It predicts 4 dates in 2009 that MAY replicate the same 4 dates that occurred in 1929 and 1987 that were the focus of Chris Carolan’s book, The Spiral Calendar. The four dates are computed very simply according to Chris “Spiral” intervals published in his book (Fibonacci based intervals counted in synodic periods of 29.5306 days).
http://www.screencast.com/users/Virginia_Jim/folders/Jing/media/e78ae4c6-8eb2-4977-b8d6-001fe77b25c8
The first of 4 dates was July 11, 2009 and was a perfect “hit”. It was a significant low. If you recall, on the date of that low, everyone….everyone was watching the infamous Head and Shoulders TOP. It was being shown on CNBC. EWI was publishing it. It ordained that the market would re test the March 2009 lows. But the July 11 date indicated that it was THE low before the next date which would be a top…and that date is October 16, 2009, yesterday.
Keep in mind any projection can never be more accurate than the projection interval. So, July 11 was the projection +- one day. And, July 11 was a Saturday. So, I’d have said that significant low could have occurred on Friday July 10, Thursday July 9, Monday July 13 or Tuesday July 14 and the model would have been credited with a successful prediction. Similarly, I’d say three dates would satisfy the October 16 prediction; Thursday October 15, Friday October 16 or Monday October 19.
Well, October 15 had a new recovery high in the DOW and SPX. I’d say that satisfies the model. There could be a remaining high according to the model on Monday or it might not occur. The model remains valid either way; it simply projected the final highest high on October 16 +- 1 day so it could have a further high Monday. Now, if Tuesday October 17 has a further recovery high, I’d say the model is bust. But for now, the model has predicted TWO monument dates in 2009 that occurred in BOTH 1929 and 1987.
Pure numerology. Nothing more. If I gave these four dates to you with the implications in June 2009, what would be the probability you’d give a numerological savant that they’d occur? One in infinity. When the first date worked, what would the probability be? Well maybe a little less worse, say one in Taleb’s 5000 lifetimes (of the universe). But now we’ve tentatively got 2 out of 4 dates are a success. It’s got me interested. A new high AFTER Monday trashes the whole thing, but until then it’s a “hmmmmm.” Here’s the implied analog in chart form aligned for the lowest low in each of the 3 years:
http://www.screencast.com/users/Virginia_Jim/folders/Jing/media/07742629-a2d9-4b56-a3e5-83f0d23443c0
Interesting stuff,
Jim
From: realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of tpmods
Sent: Saturday, October 17, 2009 8:35 AM
To: realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [RT] Failure of studies/patterns
I am seeing bearish calls in our group since last 30 days or so,needless to say all those bearish calls gone wrong predicting market trend and stopped out,then next time they came up with other patterns and gave sell calls again failed.
So we need to do self check now why we failed,this helps us in long term and increase our chances for our future trades profitibility.
take this in right spirit.
Bye and good luck.
__._,_.___
![]()
__,_._,___ |