/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.15273019]

What does /sci/ think about ta? is it worthwhile to learn it alongside mathematical finance

[bodhi No.15273150]

>>15273019
Patterns define everything in this reality. x pattern = statistical proclivity towards y outcome. It isn't rocket science

[bodhi No.15273155]

>>15273019
This isnt a good place to ask, sci/ psueds don't know any models of anything that have any relevant predictive power. They are just good goy who absorb whatever they are told too to make them good little wageslaves

[Anonymous No.15273156]

>>15273019
TA is nothing more than a graphical representation of the past.
TAfags fail when they expect past performance to dictate future behaviour.

[bodhi No.15273163]

>>15273156
case in point, you are a stone cold retard

[bodh No.15273176]

>>15273150
what about abacuses?

[bodhi No.15273181]

>>15273176

[Anonymous No.15273187]

>>15273019
>What does /sci/ think about ta?
"think"?
let me tell you what I *know* about TA: there is ZERO scientific evidence it works

[Anonymous No.15273226]

>>15273163
Not an argument.

[bodhi No.15273230]

>>15273226
this is why you are poor and I am not :)

[Anonymous No.15273246]

learning TA is about constantly combining and adjusting indicators rather than rigorously building a permanent foundation and then applying it.

[Anonymous No.15273251]

>>15273246
>learning TA is about constantly moving the goalpost when things are not going your way to try and fool your youtube viewers into thinking it works and buy your course
there, fixed it for you

[Anonymous No.15273395]

>>15273251
Yes, the first is explicitly true (the goalpost is profit) and therefore we constantly adjust to get it. the second thing corresponds to making profit too; an interesting consequence of multiple people using the same ta and acting on it dynamically alters the effectiveness of that TA for everyone. mathematical finance is recursive stochasm

[Anonymous No.15273398]

>>15273395
shut up nigger, your astrology-tier lines mean fuck all

[bodhi No.15273403]

>>15273398
You seem really stupid, in fact yor are probably the resident actual schizo depicted here >>15273181 judging by your manic outburst for no reason. But let me ask you this. When you see thing you want to purchase on sale for half price are you more or less likely to buy it?

[Anonymous No.15273417]

>>15273403
>uses value investing arguments in TA analysis
orthogonal, TA is simple chart gematria.

if you see a stock you believe is worth $100 go down from $200 to $50 of course you'll want to buy it, but that's because you have done your homework valuing the company by looking at a myriad of reports and other information. you need ZERO technical analysis to buy shit at a price you think is convenient.
(also, setting up a stop-loss condition is not TA, it's simple algorithmic risk management)

[Anonymous No.15273430]

>>15273417
shhh, I don't want your "it came to me in a dream" psychoanalysis. I asked you a very simple question. Are you capable of answering it

[Anonymous No.15273433]

>>15273430
I answered, but your gematria schizo brain is too stupid to read

[bodhi No.15273455]

>>15273433
So you are too schizophrenic to be able to answer a very simple question? I figured as much.

Objects in motion tend to stay in motion.

You will always be poor and I will always not be poor :)

[Anonymous No.15273510]

>>15273455
>Objects in motion tend to stay in motion.
so by your own schizophrenic words, if a stock goes down it should keep going down until it reaches zero.
why the hell would I buy a stock that is going to zero?