Quantum Physics and trading forex | Page 3 | Forex Factory

Options

Go to
Permalinks
Print Thread

Similar Threads

Quantum London Trading 4,442 replies

Quantum London Trading Custom EA 1,506 replies

Quantum 00 Level Daily Trading 137 replies

Application of physics in trading? 6 replies

Short Term Trading is Quantum Physics 55 replies

Attachments: Quantum Physics and trading forex
Exit Attachments

Quantum Physics and trading forex

  • #41
  • Aug 19, 2006 12:34pm Aug 19, 2006 12:34pm
Quoting Maya
When I saw the title of this thread I immediately thought of the 90's TV series Quantum Leap. Wouldn't it be nice if we could leap ahead and see what the CPI will do
If we could leap then I would have become Bernanke and announce interest rates of my choice.
  • #42
  • Aug 19, 2006 1:04pm Aug 19, 2006 1:04pm
this gets into collective consciousness too. i remember reading an article where they sent out impossible (never solved before) problems to a various people not in contact with each other. once one of them solved it, within the next few days a lot of other people did as well.

this is fine and great, but in a zero sum game (or negative some game as 2blink says), if everyone had a thought at the same time there still has to be a buyer and a seller so the market would be the same. like in Bruce Almighty if everyone wins the lottery no one wins

so everyone being connected together in one big market while battling each other leaves us at the same state. like turning your head lights on when travelling at light speed.
  • #43
  • Aug 19, 2006 7:27pm Aug 19, 2006 7:27pm
Quoting witchazel
turning your head lights on when travelling at light speed.
These words cannot be uttered by an ordinary mind.
  • #44
  • Aug 20, 2006 5:04am Aug 20, 2006 5:04am
Quoting Lou
When it comes to finding the light.... remember what the wave said to the particle: "Which one of us am I ? "




Lou
lol thats great!.
I just finnished reading an ebook title above. I've read a lot of similar things over the years and my library is heaving with material on personal and spiritual devlepment but this little book had particular impact on my trading attitudes. cant recommend it enough. I am not affiliated at all so pm me for info.
  • #45
  • Aug 20, 2006 3:11pm Aug 20, 2006 3:11pm
Robert Anton Wilson - Quantum Psychology (though it doesn't talk about trading directly)

p.s. you're welcome
  • #46
  • Aug 20, 2006 4:38pm Aug 20, 2006 4:38pm
Quoting Dark1
I would say that the spirituality/religion aspect is what can make an already good trader stand out even more. With the spirituality/religion aspect you can actually get a glimpse of what will or wont happen, not just limited to the trades but to any part of life.

As an exmaple, looking at the daily bars, the USDJPY is NOT going to 'move down and then back up again' today. So you can adjust your trade according to what you know wont happen.
That was posted on the 16th here, on the 17th on my GMT+2 timezone, daily candle, USDJPY first went down, low at 115.18, then did a sharp reversal back up only to close HIGHER than the days open at 116.02, making a very badly shaped pin bar.
That would make it a "move down then up" in my book.
I would say that makes the score reality:1 - religious mumbojumbo (which so far has proven useful only for producing crusades, suicide bombers, jihads, gayhating, clinic burning pro-lifers and outlawing any sort of sex that runs the risk of actually being fun): 0.




Cum grano salis!!!
Trust price. Know yourself.
  • #47
  • Aug 20, 2006 6:13pm Aug 20, 2006 6:13pm
Quoting SeekingLight
That was posted on the 16th here, on the 17th on my GMT+2 timezone, daily candle, USDJPY first went down, low at 115.18, then did a sharp reversal back up only to close HIGHER than the days open at 116.02, making a very badly shaped pin bar.
That would make it a "move down then up" in my book.
I would say that makes the score reality:1 - religious mumbojumbo (which so far has proven useful only for producing crusades, suicide bombers, jihads, gayhating, clinic burning pro-lifers and outlawing any sort of sex that runs the risk of actually being fun): 0.




Cum grano salis!!!
My prediction was for the 16th itself, please check the time I posted it. On the 16th the daily bar opened at around 116.06 then went up to 116.35 , after going up it went down to 115.62 and closed down from the open at 115.83. So the move for the 16th was exactly 'open then up then down and closes down'. As I said it would NOT 'move down from the open and close up' It moved up from the open and closed down.

Also my prediction for the 17th was exactly as happened, though that was not posted.

I will post a few more as they come to me.
  • #48
  • May 3, 2007 6:02pm May 3, 2007 6:02pm
Apparently Quantum physics dictates that what is real is what we percieve.
This guy should do standup!
  • #49
  • May 3, 2007 6:17pm May 3, 2007 6:17pm
Quoting Darkstar
Actually quantum physics is the study of the behavior of sub-atomic particles. Quantum theorists use probabilities only to guesstimate those behaviors.



This isn't Quantum Mechanics, its Descartian epistemology.



We can debate the philosophical value of Descartes' insight, but it won't alter the reality that even were you not to believe the baseball bat in my closet exists, if I hit you in the face with it your probably going to die.



Now this has some value. This is the general problem that inexperienced traders grapple with. They can't see the salt, not because it doesn't exist, but because they can't perceive it for some reason or another.

The solution your trying to convey is that we can alter our perception of the market and somehow make it conform to our expectations; We just need to try hard enough. This is absolute nonsense. To become successful one definitly needs to change their perception, but not in the way you describe. The perception change comes from gaining insight through education, not "wishing harder".

You're on the right path, but the side-street your looking at is a dead end.
Thank you Darkstar, saved me a rant. I've done quite a bit of QM and mathematical physics and it seems this guy was trying to talk about the observation phenomena, but took it all the wrong way and ended up thinking "perceptions". Modern physics is not even "understood" by physicists outside mathematical formalism, so I strongly suggest MBAs and traders and the like stay away or get ready to be ridiculed.
Virtue finds and chooses the mean. Aristotle, Ethica Nichomachea
  • #50
  • May 3, 2007 6:24pm May 3, 2007 6:24pm
Yeah!

It seems that further advancement reduces the cosmos to a set of formal rules and regs. I think the thread starter may have been getting at decoherence or some such, but the way it was written sounded a bit mystical for me, no offence meant really.
  • #51
  • May 3, 2007 6:29pm May 3, 2007 6:29pm
If one were to make a scale model of an atom it would be something like (someone with actual knowledge of the subject correct me if I'm way off) this:

The nucleus would be a golfball on the 50 yard line; the electrons would be pinhead size out in the end zones.

This might not be totally accurate, but you get the idea.

The particles are energy, not solid matter. Matter is condensed energy.

What's in between the particles? Space.

Matter is probably about 99.99% space. So if it's mostly nothing, does it really exist?
  • #52
  • May 3, 2007 6:51pm May 3, 2007 6:51pm
Hi Blueruby,

I think the conception of atoms as little hard golf/snooker/king kongs' balls is flawed.I mean, I think we all percieve them that way and your analogy sheds light as to the minute scale of these things, but at this scale the material world does cease to exist. I believe it is to do, in part, with the relative strenghts of the fundamental forces. The Earth can orbit the sun under the influence of gravity, but at the sub atomic level gravity is negligible. Unfortunately our human sizedness (if thats a word) does not allow us to "experience" the nuclear forces.
I like to think of everything as a wavicle, rather than a particle or a wave. Its just that big stuff is very particley and small stuff is very wavy. Inbetween stuff like radiation "particles" can be either depending on how you look at them.
  • #53
  • May 3, 2007 7:21pm May 3, 2007 7:21pm
Rusty, I enjoyed your post, much obliged. Just a few thoughts.....Reality is so much larger than any single human mind can comprehend and yet it does seem to make us feel better and more secure to think that we know how it works. The older I get the more I know, yet the paradox is that the older I get the less I know. And the older I get the more I enjoy the feeling of not knowing. It's from residing in that place of not knowing that I've understood more than what I've obtained from the several thousand books I've read on the subject the last 25 years.
  • #54
  • May 3, 2007 11:45pm May 3, 2007 11:45pm
omg this thread is beyond my mind to comprehend, but i found some missing command line:
if...... then .......
  • #55
  • May 4, 2007 1:27am May 4, 2007 1:27am
So, you want to dwelve into the Quantum Physics, perhaps finding the secret to Time Travel and go back to Mar 5 2007 so you can go LONG GBPUSD 1000 LOTS?
  • #56
  • Edited 3:06am May 4, 2007 2:33am | Edited 3:06am
I think you're confusing quantum physics with the Cartesian principle of Apriori knowledge (I think therefore I am) and its criticism of a counter philosophy called Empiricism which declared that all knowledge is gained through experience.

Quantum phyisics is the study of sub-atomic particles. I think your error lies in your misinterpretation of the related uncertainty principle. This highlights the impossibility of determining with exact precision both the position and velocity of a quantum particle at a single point in spacetime and has absolutely no opinion on whether the uses we ascribe to an object lead us to term it 'chair'

In terms of your argument, being fundamentally aware of your own existence is definitely a positive, but denying the existence of everything else except as a byproduct of that consciusness might lead to a few problems, such as

"mmmmm, cyanide, yum!"


I think the point you are trying to make is in underlining the power of original thought and its ability to change an established order.

In this you might have a point however it is much more likely that such an original thought will be successful if it uses as a catapult all those original thoughts which have gone before it. Almost the entirity of science is based upon the principle of learning through experience and of advancing through experiment. To deny its usefulness is to deny the many advantages such a world and mode of thought brings. Though you may at liberty do so such a step would be unlikely to be advantageuos either to yourself or others.

Learning from experience is the only way in which one can possible glean a workable picture of anything, whether it be the world, universe or a chart of the USD. Denying its existence or the usefulness of the hours, days, months and years humanity has spent creating the frameworks of understanding through which we interact with these things is like burning the cistine chapel in order to build your own hut.

I think Isaac Newton said it best

"If I have seen further than most men it is because I stood on the shoulders of giants."
quote of the day: . It's like deja-vu all over again
  • #57
  • May 4, 2007 2:46am May 4, 2007 2:46am
Quoting Plutonite
Thank you Darkstar, saved me a rant. I've done quite a bit of QM and mathematical physics and it seems this guy was trying to talk about the observation phenomena, but took it all the wrong way and ended up thinking "perceptions". Modern physics is not even "understood" by physicists outside mathematical formalism, so I strongly suggest MBAs and traders and the like stay away or get ready to be ridiculed.

I'm sorry, I object to this. Whether you are a trader, chicken stuffer or Dave the Indescribably Dim you have a right to learn and discuss quantum physics just as much as omlette making in Indo-China.

Quantum physics is the greatest scientific theory of our time, affects us in countless ways and purports to explain the very fabric of our existence.

As such taking an interest is to be applauded, not degraded.
quote of the day: . It's like deja-vu all over again
  • #58
  • May 4, 2007 3:02am May 4, 2007 3:02am
Quoting Rusty_forexman
Have you ever tried going to the kitchen cupboard after your wife or your mum has asked you to go and get them the salt, and when you arrive you cant find it, only to have them come 2 mins later, and find it right in front of you where you were originally looking. Maybe this has happened because in the first place, you didnt want to look for it, in your mind you already created a reality, and in that reality the salt didnt exist. To everyone around you, the salt existed....but to you for that moment you had completely blocked what salt was in your mind.
At last I have an excuse now.... on a more serious note this is good reading and keeping me busy and out of the market while we wait for the NFP... good luck to everyone
  • #59
  • May 4, 2007 3:32am May 4, 2007 3:32am
Science attempts to answer the "How?" questions.
Philosophy attempts to answer the "Why?" questions.

Quantum Mechanics is real, hard science. It is a mathematical model of the behaviour of matter at the microscopic level, which can be, and is, applied to the real world on a daily basis (eg. CDs and transistors both work using the principles of quantum mechanics). The farther you move away from the "microscopic" world, the less effective it becomes because of the complexities of macroscopic systems. On the macroscopic scale, scientists use "Statistical Mechanics" as an approximation of the interaction and behaviour of large collections of microscopic particles simply because it becomes too difficult/impossible to solve the appropriate quantum equations. This has caused some discrepancies and paradoxes, especially when scientists try to reconcile quantum mechanics with Einstein's relativity in what is known as "Quantum Field Theory". The microscopic & the macroscopic worlds seem to be dancing to different beats.

In any case, Quantum Mechanics itself is neither mystical nor spiritual. It is simply a scientific theory developed through a combination of empirical data and mathematical inferences made from this data.

However, philosophy and science have always been cousins. Even boring old Newtonian mechanics was gobbled up by philosophers and interpreted in ways that allowed them a glimpse into the world of "Why?". When quantum mechanics entered onto the scene, it brought with it previously unimagined philosophical questions, and even a few answers. It is these interpretations that get most people riled up about quantum mechanics:

Uncertainty and duality have long been forgotten by Western philosophers and in turn by laypeople, in large part due to the singleness and determinism implied by Newtonian or "Classical" Physics. Quantum Theory brought these concepts back in a very powerful way, making it's philosophical interpretations reminiscent of a lot of ideas from ancient mysticism, especially Eastern mysticism - except now these ideas also come from a trusted old friend - Science.

I personally don't see a big connection between quantum mechanics and FX. If you absolutely must use a scientific analogy, Statistical Mechanics would probably fit the mold better because it provides the simplified framework that is necessary to assess the behaviour of complex systems (i.e. the FX market).

Peace.
  • #60
  • May 4, 2007 6:42am May 4, 2007 6:42am
Newtonian mechanics places us in aworld where we are all doomed to the fate of living out pathetic clockwork lives, predetermined at the inception of the Universe. Newton was a genius paralleled by few, if any, but back then the concept of a mechanical universe played into the hands of the religious philosiphers, automatically implying the hand of a "creator" who guides our lives from birth to death.
The uncertainty principle gives us back the power of free will, meaning it is my choice to go long the euro, rather than an act ordained at the beginning of time which I have no control over.
0 traders viewing now