Re: A New Trading Game (chaos game) Played for Money and Played in Risk- Free Space

722
Hint 3

viewtopic.php?p=1295508459#p1295508459
Tutorial 04 - The strange attractor

Reread this until your head explodes or the truth is revealed to you.

Now look at these pictures....
Are you seeing them for the first time???
How many times did the Master give a message with these pictures?
Do anyone need any more explanation???
These users thanked the author ImpLaNT for the post (total 2):
Darkdoji, Chickenspicy

Re: A New Trading Game (chaos game) Played for Money and Played in Risk- Free Space

725
ImpLaNT wrote: Tue Apr 11, 2023 10:13 am All I can do is give some hints
There are, of course, also bad teachers...
And people who revel in obscurantism (because it boosts their ego etc)

“Everything that can be thought at all can be thought clearly. Everything that can be said can be said clearly.”
Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus

You are now repeating (language-wise) everything you rightly complained about in the Xard-thread.
I misjudged you completely.

PS: platitudes and evasions - see below
These users thanked the author josi for the post (total 3):
Darkdoji, maroka, WilliamB


Re: A New Trading Game (chaos game) Played for Money and Played in Risk- Free Space

726
josi wrote: Tue Apr 11, 2023 3:56 pm
Who said that here anyone should teach someone something?? Forex trading is not a given, it is a privilege. Accordingly, you need to try, learn, be preoccupied with this desire, this need to comprehend something that will allow you to move forward on this path. If people want to get a ready meal on a plate, then you have to pay for it, right? Who said that the chef has to cook something, then spoon-feed you, then hear that it was not tasty and do it all for free? And here we mean the time spent on all these endless explanations from which there is no sense. In fact, everything is very simple, if you think about it, if there is a desire to understand, then it is quite accessible.
In Xard's thread, I complained not about the fact that something was not clear in his system. I said that it only works when you enter the market "following the trend", but there are no indicators in the system that indicate this trend, despite the fact that the system is called "Trend following system". Accordingly, you have a sufficient number of losing trades because you can't accurately determine this trend with any semaphores or MA's.
Now, thanks to the Master, there is an Orbit. But this is not the main thing, but the main thing is the concept. Those who believe in this and will be able to realize will understand that there are no timeframes, there are no trends, there is only price movement from one extreme to another. Your task is to trade these movements. It's like lying on the water. Everyone knows that it's possible. But not everyone can do it. And the problem is not in physiology, but in the brain. To lie on the water you need to completely relax, and for this you need to unconditionally believe that this is possible.
I have given enough hints for those who want to try. But you need to work a little, sit in front of the terminal, watch, read, draw conclusions. This is exactly what I have been doing for the last two months. And my eyes are red because I don't sleep much. At night I see attractors in my dreams. When you get to this stage, I think everything will be revealed to you.
These users thanked the author ImpLaNT for the post:
Darkdoji

Re: A New Trading Game (chaos game) Played for Money and Played in Risk- Free Space

727
I agree with @ ImpLaNT that @regit's scheme is interesting and aught to be useful. But I suggest that instead of "haunting" for patterns in an attempt to find hidden combinations of graphical stimuli that might lead to consistent trading cues from the Screenface - let us instead focus on confirming with @regits scheme (as well as the snaps), what we know works consistently already. My reasoning is simply as I told everyone before - no two sequences are the same EVER, regardless of scale. So it is doubtful that "haunting" for some hidden set of visual cues will pay off that much (given no 2 sequences are the same ever). This is why we use the notion of phase synchrony to indicate the Inverse On command (because nothing else will turn out consistent). What do I mean by this? See slides below so that we can use snaps and video to a) confirm the CUES below (which are already consistent and accurate), and b) evaluate and discuss their various contexts in terms of applying them consistently by different traders in trading Orbit the Tool (that is, what is the common experience with the cues and why would they be complex to understand for others and not me or @ ImpLaNT)?

Frankly, I fail to see the problem because to me Orbit is the simplest to trade application ever and the apparent difficulty is just i) the shock of a uniquely different method or way of trading, and ii) the unwillingness of people to understand the concepts and instead insisting that because it is chaos mathematics it has got to be some complex set of steps that "I have been unable to explain." But it is nothing more than I have again repeated in a different way below - dead simple.

For example, @ ImpLaNT gets it to an expert level already and can in fact teach it well (in my view). Chaos and fractal geometry are underpinned by "natural" laws and laws not unlike those for how GRAVITY works and so when you see it you know it (but you must first understand the concept - what goes up must come down or you will miss it when you see it). For example, please somebody tell me this "What are the rules in and the correct steps for throwing a ball up and watching it fall?" It is the same thing with concepts such as Inverse On, Strange Attractor, etc. It is because people have refused to see the simplicity and naturalness of it all that there is a block in the required understanding (that it is NOT about indicators or some "special" technique but the science or behaviours that make the system (market), the way it is and knowing those behaviours - or laws). There can be nothing simpler in trading than trading by Orbit ----there are no rules required and yet all the patterns and behaviours are consistent and true. @ ImpLaNT you know the concepts very well help them see that it is as I spell out in the slides below and nothing more.

(-_-)

PS: For the sake of encouragement let me state the following: The theory that underpins the tool (chaos theory), functions to simplify and in no sense does it confuse. Indeed, the math involved is not a complexity at all as the equation we use is just a simple quadratic with a single maximum. The amazement of science and scientists is NOT the complexity of the equation or the difficulty of the theory, but that such a simple equation generates incredibly complex outputs when iterated, e.g. the market or the Mandelbrot set, etc. Is it not a simplification to know that the repeated folding and stretching of the space to which a variable maps is how the markets are driven? And you can see this in the tick chart and in market charts especially using the MRI tool.
These users thanked the author Darkdoji for the post (total 9):
ImpLaNT, RollerAndTrading, Jackson Doh, maroka, ItalianTrader, global, TCT_bx, Chickenspicy, Mundu19

Re: A New Trading Game (chaos game) Played for Money and Played in Risk- Free Space

728
ImpLaNT wrote: Tue Apr 11, 2023 8:46 am The power of trend...


Image
Awesome ----------------->>>Only when price moves together across all dimensions of market time can you be safe and sure of a move and hence the power of phase synchrony (Inverse On). Only then also is trade risk-free.

(-_-)
These users thanked the author Darkdoji for the post (total 2):
ImpLaNT, Chickenspicy

Re: A New Trading Game (chaos game) Played for Money and Played in Risk- Free Space

729
Practic Lesson 01
Strange Attractors on the charts


The following pictures will show the attractors of different weight values (partitions) using the example of BTCUSD M30 price chart.


I think the point is clear. Any chart is always divided into a three-legged zigzag. Any zigzag of the senior partition consists of zigzags of the junior partition, etc... this is the fractality of the model. Moreover, all attractors (zigzags) have the same constraction, but always look different.

P.S... If you don't understand, ask questions...
These users thanked the author ImpLaNT for the post (total 5):
Jackson Doh, ItalianTrader, Darkdoji, regit, TCT_bx


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: DVanAssen and 94 guests