solarian wrote: Wed Oct 11, 2023 11:40 am When looking at this post (post1295508630.html#p1295508630), the concept of "n flow cut" appeared somewhat akin to the idea of a "fractal/fluctuant pattern change" mentioned in step #3 of the list below (Developing your personal trading system.pptx slide 6). However, I'm not certain about the connection between the two (earlier post and step 3), since 'n flow cut' is explicitly mentioned in step #2 below to appear before the fractal pattern change listed in step #3.
Could someone kindly offer clarification or further details/references to help me better understand this 'n flow cut' relationship/concept? Thanks.

Reading past posts is a mixed bag as we have evolved and responded to what we perceived as trader needs over time. All the while hoping for a pick up in practical understanding and application of the tool and thereby turning the thread into a hive of active discussion. Given all that, the only sane way I see forward at this point is focusing first on learning to trade the tools and that would be the commands and items of interest around them. I hope you understand.

(-_-)

PS: Because it is a model there are different ways to look at the same thing but to the same end which unlike with systems is fixed. This is why trying to use the tool would go hand in hand with thoughts expressed about the tool and using it.

For those struggling with the Flunctant On, Inverse On w.r.t to screenface cues found this earlier post very useful:
post1295520096.html#p1295520096
Basically 6n to be considered.

Darkdoji wrote: Wed Oct 11, 2023 10:23 pm Reading past posts is a mixed bag as we have evolved and responded to what we perceived as trader needs over time. All the while hoping for a pick up in practical understanding and application of the tool and thereby turning the thread into a hive of active discussion. Given all that, the only sane way I see forward at this point is focusing first on learning to trade the tools and that would be the commands and items of interest around them. I hope you understand.
PS: Because it is a model there are different ways to look at the same thing but to the same end which unlike with systems is fixed. This is why trying to use the tool would go hand in hand with thoughts expressed about the tool and using it.

Absolutely, that's my goal.

Some analogy/metaphors on what I'm trying to do; just as a pilot shouldn't take to the skies without understanding the instruments and navigation basics, I'm focusing on mastering the essentials (definitions, concepts) at the Orbit Pilot Training Ground School. Otherwise jumping straight into Orbit flights without these foundational Orbit essentials understood would be like flying almost blind in markets.

I'm hoping that given the mathematical foundations of these core concepts and screenface within the tool, they will present themselves as objective and unequivocal (not subjective). However, cultivating an adeptness with attractors, as well as interpreting the myriad combinations of screenface cues (considering the extensive permutations), will definitely involve continued immersion and experience in Orbit.

solarian wrote: Wed Oct 11, 2023 11:34 pm For those struggling with the Flunctant On, Inverse On w.r.t to screenface cues found this earlier post very useful:
post1295520096.html#p1295520096
Basically 6n to be considered.

Yes sir you are very right. Like I said many (seemingly different) versions of the same idea are out there as well. My attitude was that I came to discuss as openly as possible the concepts around which Orbit the Tool works. I assumed an equally educated cohort (I mean in terms of the level of intellectual accessibility of the ideas discussed here not in terms of specialisms), who would not only be interested in the various concepts we discuss but who would be interested enough to do some basic digging around to grasp these concepts and make them a commonly accepted understanding of the same thing. Inverse On is a mathematical concept NOT A SIGNAL and we prove with Orbit that the market trades a bijective stream up and down one side at a time. Our hope was that people would find out about bijection for themselves (and we posted math sites to enable that), so that it becomes a common understanding of the mechanism that drives movement given the binary buy/sell activity of market participants. Were this the attitude, then it becomes simple for all to appreciate that when we have a bijective system, by definition ,such a system has continuous inverse on which is why the movement is sustainable in the first place. In addition, the hope was that all those understanding the concept also understand it as one would the laws of physics such as gravity. In other words, when Orbit says Inverse On a trader with this understanding knows she is not trading a signal but a concept, a natural law THAT MUST COMPLETE. So that trader confidence is fully informed by the concept. What we have found to our discouragement is people looking to be spoon fed to the point of breaking down (within such a clear mathematical concept for instance), steps on what do, when and how etc etc. People think of Orbit as some silly little new "system" they might learn to trade and make some money now and again. This detracts from the idea that Orbit represents the magic in mathematics brought to trading where the trader sees a whole new world and therefore a whole new way of doing this difficult thing (until now), called trading much more successfully backed by science -----> something everyone can verify for themselves.

Please note very strongly I am not addressing myself to you or your question as much as I am addressing the general public. So yes 6n but if you were to persist and try to understand what the concept means in mathematics and how it works and therefore why it defines flows, you will then see that in Orbit when we say Inverse On we merely specify an analogue mathematical condition. But the approach of the trader (including the full understanding that he cannot possibly lose a trade under that condition and why), then drives the traders response, actions, expectations etc. Orbit Screenface is therefore a prompt to trigger in the mind of the informed trader what is going on and what concept is relied on in terms of explaining a current market condition, etc etc.

I am sorry and I am not in any sense complaining about you as I have stated. Not at all because since you came along you have been asking the kinds of questions that would truly help understanding. Just letting you know whats on my mind about the whole effort so far. I will not trade what I do not understand. But given a verifiable thing such as Orbit I would dig out the truth and trade it like hell. Instead people are well just disappointingly waiting for what I do not exactly know ------- yet everything is specified.

(-_-)

solarian wrote: Thu Oct 12, 2023 12:57 am Absolutely, that's my goal.

Some analogy/metaphors on what I'm trying to do; just as a pilot shouldn't take to the skies without understanding the instruments and navigation basics, I'm focusing on mastering the essentials (definitions, concepts) at the Orbit Pilot Training Ground School. Otherwise jumping straight into Orbit flights without these foundational Orbit essentials understood would be like flying almost blind in markets.

I'm hoping that given the mathematical foundations of these core concepts and screenface within the tool, they will present themselves as objective and unequivocal (not subjective). However, cultivating an adeptness with attractors, as well as interpreting the myriad combinations of screenface cues (considering the extensive permutations), will definitely involve continued immersion and experience in Orbit.

Thank you and just to let you know your approach is not just reasonable it is welcome. We think in terms of a trading revolution but of course there can be no such thing unless there is mass understanding (unavoidably following the Gaussian adoption curve in time we know). We are excited that very soon (and hopefully), we will be able to show for one or two specific users what it really means to accept and adopt the ideas that define Orbit (not to mention how incredibly simple it is to apply) ----------> Chaos theory and fractal geometry. The problem is when it comes to trading most so-called traders are all mouth and no or very little hands on trying of things new especially when people see the word mathematics associated with an approach. But there are no calculations involved here and Mandelbrot made clear that much of this is visual. You are not even required to understand anything technically (mathematically), just conceptual understanding to ground your imagination in is sufficient. For example, we (at least you guys living in pretty cold conditions sometimes), watch skiers do jumps in which without the skier or the observer ever considering the mathematics of what the skier does in these nice and entertaining jumps we see, can easily be shown as such - an exercise in geometry. Because in simple terms the actions of the skier represent rotations and translations as defined by geometry and easily revealed to be absolutely so by high speed photography captured frame by frame. Many things in life follow such mathematical analogues. All we want people to know is that the same is true of markets in terms of chaos theory and fractal geometry. Now if that is true (and it can be for the individual using his head and eyes to confirm), then the way we have been trading, our fears, earnings, styles and "systems" to date amount to a lot of nonsense ------> traders selling themselves cheaply to superstition and ignorance. But becoming aware means we can change all of that even in our current systems not to mention trading by Orbit. So frankly all I need is to show this to be true for one or two persons and I am out of this place no longer a bother to anyone at all. I hope that happens soon. Cheers

(-_-)

PS: I understand that most people come around because they want to see that system promising 100/100 times correct calls without any desire to find out and understand why that is at all possible. Of course we positively discourage such people from hanging around the thread and hope they keep and stay far away. Why should such people partake in such a promise. The process must be managed such that no one breaks in by chance. It is the audacity to indefinite wealth why should anyone at all stroll in as if entitled ---------> that will NOT happen.

Think about it and think how simple it really all is when trading by Orbit a) When a market is at a top you get CMD 1 Cy = TTo down so you enter down in risk-free space and therefore you can hold that entry to end of CMD 1 down and or retrade the same direction each time 2 arrows (Orbit Spot + Range Arrow which = Command 2) come on pointing in the CMD 1direction. Same thing you are at a bottom CMD 1 comes on and you can enter up hold the trade for the duration of the CMD and or keep repeating trades in the same direction on CMD 2 coming on simple: 2 arrows point you follow in the direction of the main CMD. But in a major or not so major pullback you can get confused because a) price moves counter trend and b) you do not know what direction it will break to trend and so ENTER THE DRAGON = CMD 0 to your rescue. When you see that 5n Cy = TTo or c you a) know it is a pullback b) you follow its changes and that leads you to negotiate a usually difficult part of the attractor to follow. All three CMD's cover all the parts of the attractor where traders lose all their money and we have made this simple and clear in Orbit. I have put out all the possible shades of the combinations of colours that indicate what is going on per command given all are subject to changes in conditions and these are so simple anyone including newbies can work what colour combination is telling you. So frankly pardon me when I am confused people cannot trade Orbit and make money after a week. Yes initially, practice and demo practice but without practice I do not see how you learn to trade a pattern and this pattern we are talking about all the trades you would ever need to make as a trader. So what else?

(-_-)

PS: You learn to calibrate direction by whether or not you backed by a H4 pivot in your trade. Things changing colours mean nothing unless you know market intent and market intent depends on whether the market has signed 6n to flow AND SO NEVER FORGET THE MARKET SIGNED FLOWS = 6N POINT TO 6N POINT. Not sure there is any kind of trading (including the complicated), more likely to succeed than what I have just said. Anyone tell me anything simpler in trading than the above?

Hi people, sorry about the time, I'm going to work now but y recorded on last night a crossover of Orbit clean on H4/n6 and H1/n5 M5/n2 and M1/N1 with xard 39 system

I recommend download video and watch with VLC on 4x of velocity.



enjoy

@Woodyz I wonder if the above post would help your quest post1295525480.html#p1295525480?

a) Command 1 is trend because price moves up and down in only one direction at a time. Once you read it at a low or high you know 2 things: First, you know direction and second you know risk-free space (meaning for instance if you make a mistake in timing an entry in the command direction no worries sooner rather than later your trade will turn profitable again so in risk-free space you can only suffer adverse excursion NOT loss on trader error trend side). I hope that is simple and clear enough?
b) Command 2 depends on Command 1 and is given by Orbit Spot Arrow + Range Arrow pointing in the same direction together. If this direction is the same as Command side you are effectively trading the trend. If it is pointing opposite then of course you are trading against the trend without risk-free space cover. But that is how you make entries for spot trades and scalps in Orbit. If you are a position trader you trade on Command 1 and hold your trade.
c) Now within the trend you have pullbacks which can be confusing and difficult to manage and for that you have Command 0 as indicated in the post above. Its job i) is to alert you to what is about to happen ii) So you decide how to manage the situation e.g. take profit, stay out of trade or whatever your style/strategy dictates. iii) Command 0 also guides you through the folding moves in FLE assuming you decide to trade some or all of the moves within that dynamical structure called FLE or Pullback. iv) Command 0 then points you correctly to its exit (continuation or reversal). So for us this is KISS, however you need hands on practice sufficient enough to master the words here.
d) Everything on Screenface has its use for instance Ordinals whether single or double arrow indicates the amount of cohesion in direction depending on scale and so when you take a trade and it is going in a direction with double arrow S Ordinal you follow the up/down or down/up indication you see to understand you are trading in a range like structure not a trend so watch stops and take profit early. A single arrow says fire on in direction. These things are too many to be compact but they describe the dynamics so you must trial and experience the tool while observing such changes in Screenface to gain their meanings and utility.
e) I hope I am KISS compliant in my statements here? If so great.

I would also remark that different concepts ultimately reflect different levels or degrees of complexity in terms of the ability or effort required in comprehension and often the notion of KISS (especially as understood and applied by “technical” types), can be seen many times as an excuse for not playing your part which may be is why the Pilot Commander a.k.a The Whitedoji (he is NAVY), was ticked off. He is probably one of the very best Orbit traders around. Chaos as we have explained is pretty simple as is trading Orbit and his point may be that you need to meet him half way. I have not discussed you with him but knowing him, it might be that he felt all you wanted to know is knowable by KISS your side or in other words spending time observing and trialling the tool for a while (rather than putting the load for your comprehension on him). Many times you got to meet concepts halfway to KISS by breaking it down one by one which you can only do hands on trialling and noting what you find. Nothing is so compact in trading space that it is so simple as to be black or white. Because you are dealing with movement that distorts and deforms space and all things within the same space.
I hope I have been at least a little help. If not what are the specific issues for you?

(-_-) The Crow

RollerAndTrading wrote: Thu Oct 12, 2023 10:26 pm

Hey thanks but let me remark that to me this was more an Xzard promo than it was an Orbit exposition. Clearly you seek to make a point (of which I am not clear about personally but others may get it), however may I suggest that Orbit is an Oscillator Model of the market and Xzard is a trading "system" so there is nothing to compare or contrast. It is clear that you do not understand the difference in the two concepts and therefore appear to be drawing and circulating probably wrong conclusions and indeed unneeded stimuli in support. This of course is based on your very limited scope of understanding (in terms of what we are about). I would strongly suggest that Xzard does not need any promotion (and certainly not on the Orbit thread), because it is a well known and widely used trading "system" which has nothing at all to do with Orbit except that it trades in the same chaotic space and follows the exact rules of Orbit to work (however, premised on the "technical" sense or approach in trading). That is the only indisputable connection (but there are hundreds if not thousands of such and we welcome them all as a truth of our proposition).

On this thread the focus is chaos theory and fractal geometry. That said, I imagined that your goal was to learn and enable others learn how the Screenface works over time and to allow for instance people observe and see the commands specific to Orbit at work in recorded time. I did not of course see any of that, no Screenface showed anywhere which betrays your focus to be totally different and completely off. Therefore, if you do not mind I feel it will be a) More helpful if you kept to your promise of providing those interested in Orbit with a screening of the tool in action, but in a way that promotes learning of the tool b) Especially show the Screenface in action to enable people observe in particular the pattern of commands and their implications for trade decision making. I think that will be helpful indeed.

Otherwise and if that is not your interest or purpose then I fail to see your point. I hope next time we will see Orbit distracted by nothing and fully focused on what people wish to see about Orbit. That I hope is not something that presents you with any "technical" difficulties I am sure. You see, I need for people (including you if you are interested) to begin to grasp the meaning of the concept of Orbit the Tool and to do so well enough to gain the required understanding. If you say deal on that, I will be most gratified and if you say no deal then frankly I am not sure Xzard promos are best circulated here and you may wish to show your future impressions on the Xzard Trend Following thread ----------------------> please note I say this with seriousness and without prejudice to your views on anything (whatever those may be). This thread is just starting and as you will soon see (in a matter of days in fact), there is deepening about to occur and having spent years finding out stuff unknown to the trading world that would be useful to traders, it is only right that I am allowed to do so free of the sort of very negative and crude activism you appear to have displayed here. I thank you if you will expose Orbit in the way we understood you to have intended prior, but if not then goodbye even as we still remain friends. What we are doing here is not petty at all whether you understand it or not, but all will find out in the days to come -------------------> step by step, we just started and it is NOT about the irrelevancies you appear concerned with (with all due respect). Lovely if you hear me clearly.

The Crow (_-_) Inverted

PS: Orbit the Tool once again is NOT a trading "system" it is an Oscillator Model of the Market. To participate here that should be your focus and interest. Many trading "system" threads exist in this forum. What is to be gained here is completely different from what is to be gained in threads for trading "systems" there is simply no compare.

In a few days I am going to teach a lesson (and I mean teach a lesson). A practical lesson and begin to show the real difference between a chaotic model of the market and a “system” any “system” at all. I am going to show that chaos affects traders mentally and that this correlates with entry points (Initial Conditions and particularly intermittency), these are the points in time when trades are won, lost, or missed – Initial Conditions is also known as “the butterfly effect” or simply chaos. Without taking any statistics most traders are too scared to actually trade on any day. Most are just talking, no one is making an active living and going big time from trading - NONE.

ONLY A MATHEMATICAL MODEL OF THE MARKET CAN BREAK THAT cycle.

So it is not about signals NO. It is about control only a model provides control and only a model can be depended on to deliver control 100/100 entries (this is the critical measure of a model).

THAT IS the DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A MATHEMATICAL MODEL OF THE MARKET AND A “system.” IN A FEW DAYS. This will help us understand what something that is NOT a trading “system” is doing in the trading “systems” forum even if it is actually an Iterated Functions System of the Market. I will show you how to enter Orbit, as many time as you choose and in a way that no “system” in the world (that is not automated), can show you NONE. In a matter of DAYS.
Meantime trading Gold and saw Command 0 trigger: First slide is the command 0 Version Orbit specially made for entry and testing for the everybody crowd as you read this. Second slide my screen (on mine there is an added structure to time the next bar out in reverse --do not forget we are in FLE). A Model is NOT a trading “system” and it is about CONTROL not “signals”.

(_-_)

PS: Everything in the diagram can be justified before even academic mathematics and no questions.