ImpLaNT wrote: Sat Sep 16, 2023 1:26 am @Josi...Here people undergo a lobotomy
He can describe the market using mathematics...

I agree: the way you treat your "professor" can remind a person of patients after they underwent a "lobotomy".
I find it hilarious that you (and your master) seem to think moving averages (to give but one example you mention - but one could of course bring up all other aspects of technical trading) are NOT pure mathematics.
This implies that you (and your master) seem to think:
a) there is no maths outside of the realm of chaos (if this is really what Orbit represents - which I doubt until proven wrong)
b) that chaos is REAL mathematics (whereas the rest is "somehow" too simple or "disfiguring" as a concept)

josi wrote: Sat Sep 16, 2023 8:44 pm I agree: the way you treat your "professor" can remind a person of patients after they underwent a "lobotomy".
I find it hilarious that you (and your master) seem to think moving averages (to give but one example you mention - but one could of course bring up all other aspects of technical trading) are NOT pure mathematics.
This implies that you (and your master) seem to think:
a) there is no maths outside of the realm of chaos (if this is really what Orbit represents - which I doubt until proven wrong)
b) that chaos is REAL mathematics (whereas the rest is "somehow" to simple or "disfiguring" as a concept)

Not to me but just to mention yes there is other math mostly totally useless (statistics and fibs), but the math needs to be the right one. There is only one right one man. Chaos. A bit tired of restating what is obvious to everyone but you. I think you should go away and come back when you are the last man standing (pursuing expertise in rubbish).

(-_-)

Darkdoji wrote: Sat Sep 16, 2023 8:40 pm You already made up your mind I am scam not worth your time.
You also believe that the market is driven by news and nothing else and therefore random and so nothing we say is dispelling that ignorance from your mind
It will pay you more to listen to what we are saying and try them out and until you can disprove us work towards becoming a better trader or whatever you are.
Seriously you cannot disprove an equation you do not understand.
...
At this point your fears and ignorance of market dynamics drive your conviction that the market is random and news driven.
But if you do not find what we are saying intellectually accessible and cannot therefore ever understand the basics then shut it and stay away
I laugh at your antics

Given the fact that you don't know me at all, you really make a lot of assumptions and claims about me.
If your maths is as emotionally driven as your rants, one has to begin to doubt your self-proclaimed epertise.
An acquaintance of mine (who works as a mathematician) checked your thread a while ago (because he is interested in the field of chaos), identified you as a Nigerian but wasn't following up on your rants because - as far as he could tell - you never seemed to have published anything relevant at all within the field of chaos.
Now theoretically - of course - that doesn't mean that you have nothing relevant to say on the subject, but your permanent loss of control (trumped up claims, rants, insults etc) makes one a tiny bit skeptical.

josi wrote: Sat Sep 16, 2023 8:44 pm I agree: the way you treat your "professor" can remind a person of patients after they underwent a "lobotomy".
I find it hilarious that you (and your master) seem to think moving averages (to give but one example you mention - but one could of course bring up all other aspects of technical trading) are NOT pure mathematics.
This implies that you (and your master) seem to think:
a) there is no maths outside of the realm of chaos (if this is really what Orbit represents - which I doubt until proven wrong)
b) that chaos is REAL mathematics (whereas the rest is "somehow" too simple or "disfiguring" as a concept)

I guess you're just a troll. I will explain to you for the last time how technical analysis differs from what is described in this thread. So...
Remember and finally understand that all technical analysis, absolutely all, is built on certain principles obtained empirically. Be it moving averages, or Fibonacci levels, channels, resistance and support, etc... Absolutely all of this was first noticed by someone, then described and began to be used everywhere. There is no theoretical aspect to this. Just someone's observations and nothing more. Why does this sometimes work? Because the market crowd uses this and accordingly places their orders in the area of one level or another. This causes so-called price rebounds from these levels. You use MA a lot. Explain where SMA200 came from, or SMA 100, EMA 36, etc... Why not 250, 170, or 77? Simply because someone once noticed that these curves work as fairly clear trend indicators. Why do they work? Because they are used and people pay attention to them. What's the theory behind them? - none.
Here the situation is the opposite. The man studied chaos theory and came to the conclusion that price movement corresponds to a mathematical model of deterministic chaos in discrete space. Then he managed to adapt the mathematical theory to market reality. This took years of work. And a man at the end of his life is trying to convey something to us incompetents, to share his life’s work and the results of his work, and he does this in incredibly difficult conditions. And he receives ignorance and boorish behavior in response. In short, I am closing this issue and no one here will respond to your attacks anymore.
If you don’t want to understand and accept the truth, live in a lie - your right.

ImpLaNT wrote: Sat Sep 16, 2023 1:26 am Where there is mathematics, everything else is bullshit.

@ImpLaNT Thanks in particular for this post. I really mean that. A pity there is no Ignore button on this site otherwise the best thing would be to ignore this dude and his ignorance by hitting that button instead of wasting time trying to explain anything to an "expert". That is what he imagines he is and his mind is driven by this false ego (oversized and corrupt). There is a simple solution though and I am really thinking about it. But it is simply too dangerous. That solution would involve sharing the version I have. In that version there is a single button you can use to win whatever number of trade opportunities come your way in any asset you choose to trade.

First, it is the same in structure with what everyone is using but a) Spot Trade command can be used to trade so when you see it come on (regardless of direction), you buy or sell and win every single time. But it requires that you locate price action and understand point matching b) It has other useful commands for managing trades beyond point to point which can be outlined and employed as the trader desires. There is no limit therefore to winning but it will drive people crazy which is why I do not show trades in that mode but try instead to keep people focused on what amounts to gaining the same result by requiring personal understanding. Plus it is dangerous.

1 In my version you gain continuous back to back wins and you do not have to think or consider the precepts that makes that possible.
2. This means you do not need to learn any chaos at all or anything just hitting spot buy/sell to become a millionaire in the time of choosing. But you have yourself warned against that for obvious reasons. I want to be responsible.
3. Dangerous because there are dangerous people everywhere - terrorists and other criminals can simply fund their sordid roles from trading. People like @josi and co will benefit while still coming around to yak their rubbish and even regular users will forget the great Mandelbrot who invented the math that makes it possible.
3. But may be what I should do is release it for a month and then stop it. That will shut these nobodies yakking rubbish and prove the point directly and also it will then teach everyone directly how to use the current public version such that when it is withdrawn only real Orbit traders survive given that they would have seen that the claim of the Holy Grail is manifestly real. What do you think? Since I am getting tired of the rubbish I have to put up with and need to focus on real traders not pretenders?
4. But we cannot have it in circulation for more than a month or in fact a week or two because of the danger. I have to be responsible (Einstein is reputed to have regretted the atom bomb - and was not his fault just the hopelessness of the human mind the same traits as the likes of @josi is showing). Or I can simply just stop at showing trades in that mode without releasing it even for a week because am I sure the public one is already compromised as I hear .ex4 is easily broken in spite of what metaquotes claims. But will people not still badmouth and discourage others? It is a complex issue for me and I need to control such access to money and hence the desperate need for the Cloud.

(-_-)

PS: Or we keep it within a small set here to show everyone so that no one thinks it is because I know the tool but that is even more dangerous. When I cracked the market I was overjoyed on an intellectual level but it is now becoming a real problem because of the likes of @josi and @regit etc

josi wrote: Sat Sep 16, 2023 9:01 pm Given the fact that you don't know me at all, you really make a lot of assumptions and claims about me.
If your maths is as emotionally driven as your rants, one has to begin to doubt your self-proclaimed epertise.
An acquaintance of mine (who works as a mathematician) checked your thread a while ago (because he is interested in the field of chaos), identified you as a Nigerian but wasn't following up on your rants because - as far as he could tell - you never seemed to have published anything relevant at all within the field of chaos.
Now theoretically - of course - that doesn't mean that you have nothing relevant to say on the subject, but your permanent loss of control (trumped up claims, rants, insults etc) makes one a tiny bit skeptical.

I was born a Nigerian and I love Nigeria with all that I have and can become. Nigeria is a lovely place with great people and incredible potential. If you and your friend simply dispute people based on where they come from there is nothing I can do about that and racism is an illogicality, an evil that does the world no good. So promoting such towards me is fine I know many know that such extremism is baseless. Does not in anyway invalidate my truth. You and others e.g. @regit do not know the harm such behaviour costs you as individuals but I really do not care for the likes of you filled with hate and ignorance. I am really cool with that because I must certainly be superior to think differently than you two as I relate on the basis of the merit of someone's output NOT where they may or may not come from. But at this point I think you have gone too far. I really do.

(-_-)

Darkdoji wrote: Sat Sep 16, 2023 9:36 pm

Initially, I told you, if you remember, that... If this is true and your approach is cracking the system, it is very dangerous. For completely different reasons. Therefore, there is no need to let the genie out of the bottle to prove something to someone...
As for ex4... You are absolutely right. It cracks easily. I already told you that I have a friend who is a coder. If you see what miracles this man works... Do you admit that if you are a professor of chaos, then there may be people of equal importance but in the field of coding? This man added options to the compiled indicators that they did not have, for example, MTF, supplied them with buttons, added options for displaying on history, etc... That is, he worked with ex4 as if he had the source code in front of him. The only problem...it took a lot of time and effort from him. What he could do with the source code in a couple of hours, with the decompiled versions required a week of work. So, you understand, it is quite possible to crack your expiring date protection.
Regarding your proposal... You know, I want to learn how to read space correctly 100/100 times. This is the key and I understand it. I don't know if this is possible to achieve. And pressing the button when the light comes on... is more likely to be someone similar to Pavlov’s experimental dogs, in which he studied reflexes... I want to understand how to be unambiguously right using your tool and approach. I know that what you have goes far beyond what we have. We have a truncated version of the tool on our hands, despite the fact that the interface is the same...

ImpLaNT wrote: Sat Sep 16, 2023 10:25 pm I want to understand how to be unambiguously right using your tool and approach. I know that what you have goes far beyond what we have. We have a truncated version of the tool on our hands, despite the fact that the interface is the same...

Ok thank you will just show trades then and pursue your above desire for all. Should not take time (where people do not distract). Patience is required of course and I understand. The way I talk and the ease with which I see Orbit may be part of the problem. But will do as much as I can to inject more "realism" in my discussions (you know when I say Orbit there are several all from the same strand so sometimes I am talking about the final version and other times thinking based on the version I use but meanwhile people have to learn and understand the same things without the assurance that I have on the public prototype and that takes time). Anyway the struggle continues.

(-_-)

Darkdoji wrote: Sat Sep 16, 2023 10:19 pm as I relate on the basis of the merit of someone's output NOT where they may or may not come from

Same here, same here.
Merit is everything, I think. (Despite the critical book by Michael Sandel)
When I said - Nigerian - I just didn't want to be indiscrete.
The person I mentioned looked at your profiles, cloud, credentials etc and found out who - probably - you are as a person, i. e. identified your name.
Based on that, he checked your output (i. e. possible publications in journals, books etc - as university types are prone to do): and lo & behold: nothing of any significance was ever published by you on chaos theory (or other relevant mathematical matters).
That you should think me a racist (only based on the fact that I called you Nigerian) just shows again that you know absolutely nothing about me (while without any hesitation or scruples spreading fictions & falsities).

Orbit and Mathematics

Just for information. One of the reasons Chaos is not widely known in trading is that I think the university types have no regard for trading and traders and do not necessarily think of the practical application of chaos in trading as worth the time of mathematics (just a personal view and I may be wrong). NASA employs chaos control (similar in effect to what we did in Orbit), in managing complex space Orbits such as when you want to maneuver a space craft to directly crash into an object in space. Mathematicians also are interested in things like using chaos control in mixing chemicals to reflect near perfect or improved mixtures than otherwise, in complex industrial processes and other things like that as well as some "crazy" other abstract mathematical applications, etc and few would include making billions of $'s in that list. Not everyone regards money in the way traders do or think that trading is such a feat as to take their precious time. Lets not forget mathematicians are that and reach levels of abstract thinking that ordinary creatures like you and me would consider "madness," these are people that demand proof in work so pristine I laugh sometimes. For instance you want to make money and there is a mathematical application that would allow you do that, but what the mathematician would regard broaching the subject at all might require 10 course years of the most advanced mathematics you can imagine just to gain favorable peer review. How much would that pay you? Near 0 but for the mathematician a standing and recognition among peers. You decide therefore what the worth of publications and that sort of academic razz would be to you or whether the presence or lack of publications will dissuade any sane trader from use of a tool demonstrated to be delivering the goods. For the ignorant (who in the first place can not read beyond the name of the author of most mathematical works), it might sound like a requirement but for the honest mind - who cares? Certainly not my trading self. I am not in the habit of asking for the academic credentials of the Boing engineers that build the planes I fly - I am interested that the service works.

However, what we are doing here is a feat in mathematics - real and proper. Admittedly yet to be subjected to the sort of mathematical rigor a mathematical work of the academic type would require, but fully satisfying the rigors employed in a commercial project for instance, which when subjected to academic review should prove quite satisfactory to the reviewer. So lets not get carried away by ignorance of the type suggested elsewhere. Now let me add that the great Mandelbrot said what I have done was impossible - that is the last word in Mathematics. But I have proved him wrong and were he alive, it is to this hero of mine that I would have published my thesis for only he has the brains and took the time to define the market in fractal terms. Let me also say this. It is not a matter of mathematics it is a matter of trading by mathematics. Very few in mathematics have the brains to go as far we have in mathematics though those ignorant of the severity of our knowledge and the feat that has resulted think it is a simple matter (their brains can only go as far as trading "systems"). No Orbit is NOT a simple matter. So (and I have stated so elsewhere on this thread), that one of the aims of the thread is to attract the interest of the academic world to have them come over so that without publishing any silly paper we get the mathematical acclaim we deserve from academics doing what they do best (gaining Ph.D.'s from the practical work of others by disputing or confirming such thesis or applications). It is the smart way to go rather than going around trying to gain the approval of mathematicians for something intended as an application. That is daft but of course when you are generally ignorant every thought would appear "brilliant" to you until you open your mouth in public and get put in your place. So we welcome investigations of all kinds and in fact desperate for such attention as it would be a cheap way out and also knowing that no one dead or alive can dispute the basis of Orbit - rather it would gain acclaim as a result. So the hope remains we will attract the attention of these arcane minds who routinely view us (traders) as ignorant gamblers. But we are NOT gamblers in mind, just people trying to make good without knowing how -BUT NOW WE KNOW - so GAME ON.

PS: Sad Mandelbrot is gone for nothing would have pleased more personally than to present him THE GRANDMASTER OF DETERMINISTIC TRADING with the work of his mind and in a way that would have triggered more from him and others that in fact approximate his mind in mathematics. To be clear no riff raff mathematician would dare --------------> because a) it takes more than a degree even a doctorate to come around Orbit the Tool. That is how involved the work that makes Orbit tick is. For those not self-respecting to dare they would meet the same fate as similar persons on Quora because they must bow to something they could have never imagined possible from the little they know. I take no prisoners as a rule.

The Crow (_-_) Inverted