[QUOTE=Krelian99]I'm no boss. You are contrary to yourself. That's what confuses me.
Page 6 of your presentation is dedicated to the predictability and that it can be improved.
Page 8: "The point here is that fractals are described by precise mathematical rules and properties - and these describe fractals NOT to be random." Following page is about mathematic models of Fractal Geometry.
Pages 12-16 are the important ones in my eyes, and yes I absolutely agree. Understand the money flow and you understand the market. But who knows if you say that's already obsolete. And then I see the chart you posted and this has nothing to do with the idea of these 5 pages of your presentation in your first post and has nothing to do with the Chaos Theory as you describe at page 12-16 either. Obviously, you see the market in a different way when you use this chart, and here I wondered what YOU define as fractal. Have you read or understood your own presentation? I'm not so sure, and I'm also not sure whether you understood B. Williams, but please go on trying to insult me per PM if you have fun with that.
I have still a real life.[/QUOTE] Aha - now we can talk and of course (reading the stuff once again, this time without annoyance toward anything we have said to each other so far would indeed help). But let us deal with your questions one by one. a) Slides 11 - 17 to which you refer as 12 - 16 have nothing whatsoever to do with money flow - that section has to do with market microstructure, order flow and how the microstructure defines spot pivots, highlighting the iterative
nature of the process and especially how i) the order matching process defines dynamic "demand and supply schedules" in order to process ii) latent dynamic "demand and supply curves" in market time. iii) We then show how the output of this process resolves in price points (clearing points) called spot pivots
we especially show how something called intermittency (or aperiodic cyclicality - the signature sign of chaos) conditions the microstructure. iv) We then move from that to define why and how the simplicity and recursion of market transactions define the fractality of markets. v) After which we define and justify what we call fractal primitives
by the Iterated Functions Systems (IFS) formalism of fractal geometry (thus incontrovertibly defining what a market fractal is and how it behaves) vi) finally we define the self-affine nature of market fractals for exactly how they define in micro (and therefore macro) space i.e. as linear inequalities and show clearly how the feedback loop works in the cyclical flow of markets. The problem with thinking of this section as dealing with money flow is that it misses the point and especially the fit with the technical descriptions of chaos in slides 2 and 3 (I hope you understood those and their importance to our discovery) as well as the connection with fractals in slides 6 - 9 (which is a very short and simple course in fractal geometry). So everything follows a logical sequence from the first slide to the last in the series. I of course cannot discuss the more interesting sections beyond where you apparently stopped and which shows the behavior and nature of fractals in the macrostructure and the final parts which shows how we trade fractals because you clearly have not read them (otherwise you would be clear how and why all of our charts, as they are now, are expressions of the same thing we describe in the chaology whether we track them as fractals or as Gann squares or whatever). I would of course encourage that you persist beyond where you stopped as you will then see what I mean here even more clearly. b) So we NEVER predict because the model is so intuitive you just sit back and let it tell when to trade and for what range (once the indication is that price is locked into a defined phase in a defined direction and for a defined range) so there is in fact no sense in which my chart or the chart you showed us earlier in the thread are not about chaos and fractals. However, in order to understand why in fact my chart particularly fits the thinking outlined please review this post https://www.forex-station.com/post/show_single_post?pid=1294976313&postcount=24&forum=578265. There is no contradiction whatsoever and I would encourage you to explore our meanings with an open mind (and especially ignore at this point whatever seeming animosity existed before now since we are now getting to be on the same page. Sometimes the human process of developing a positive relationship does not begin on a positive note but our goals are the same to improve our understanding of the market and as such we should be friends don't you think?). Finally, boss is a fun word friends use to call each other and of course you being from a different culture than me implies that you may not fully understand the nuances of my behaviors and me yours but lets not hold that against each other. No insult was intended. Of course you know the reference to our PM discussions (which finally led I think to this positive development) is more a misunderstanding now resolved than anything else - as gentlemen we should bear no grudge and move on. We are now best friends are we NOT? Cheers mate and thanks for taking your time to begin the process of constructive engagement.