A jump to the beginning - chaos and market forces

i literally do this to my screen , what i find is this remove my subjectivity, and see what CP means where he said "you can put boundary anywhere you want"

im new here but interesting what cp post

I'm familiar with that gumball jar experiment. The Code episode 2 or something. I think that model has been applied to trading. Crowd sentiment. Sparkprofit.com and a few others I don't recall off the top of my head do that sort of thing. I wonder if some of those Cyprus based binary option joints do anything with their data. If not, they should. They basically have direction and price sentiment. Oanda has a lot of those sorts of tools on their website or used to but I never bothered to make heads/tails out of them.

One of my older systems is nothing but trading the bell curve. But on multiple time frames. Similar to Market Profile but easier to read. Attached chart is what I programmed into Excel. Looks like a lot of BS but it's pretty damn simple. Dashed line is price. The ma's are actually time series forecasts. Channel lines are mean and +-1 and +-2 deviations. When channel is up and price is towards the bottom look to go long targeting the mean and then the +1 deviation. Trigger is tsf lines crossing at or beyond the +-1 deviation. All of the numbers on the right are just various price levels. Pivots, fibs, and the stat values. Flashing lights for quick indication of trend and if price is in a buy or sell zone.

For sure. Gather data, develop a historical result set and go from there. I wouldn't consider my quest a quest of prediction. I view it as plotting what I believe to be the most probable wave set from a series of wave sets. Forecasting vs predicting.

The same could be said of my Gann work and even ventures into the astro world. Correlation <> Causation blah blah blah and past <> future, but if there's enough correlation, then why not? My expression is if the market moved every time my neighbors dog shit on my lawn, I'd be watching for that dog with my finger on the buy/sell button. Who cares if there is zero relation. But if it means 6 times out of 10 there's a trade there, then I'm ahead. 2:1 reward/risk and I only need to be 4 times out of 10 to be ahead.

Hi all, Hi Alex, nice thread!

First thing that came to my mind when i read your thread is this frase i heard: we are the universe becoming aware/conscious of itself.
It is in line with the believe that we are all connected, we are all made of the same stuff/energy, we are the conscious universe.
How will this help us in trading: i have this feeling that it is true when they say that our conscious creates our reality. Therefore i have made a conscious decision to be in the reality where i succeed in profitable trading.
If there is balance, there must also be an universe where i don't succeed, but that doesn't matter to me
I do now that it works like this because i am successful in trading.

Past VS Present

I will try to explain why for me history is not relevant in order to make profitable trades.
Everything has a purpose, everything has a nature, everything has properties.
Trading is intangile and it is transcribed to a tangible form of price on charts.
Gann “It is impossible here to give an adequate idea of the Law of
Vibration as I apply it to the markets, however, the layman may be able
to grasp some of the principles when I state that the Law of Vibration is
the fundamental law upon which wireless telegraphy, wireless
telephones and phonographs are based. Without the existence of this
law the above inventions would have been impossible.”
What is this law? It is the elctromagnetic field, waves composed of two fields one electric and one magnetic.

Here are waves of brain


Here is a wave of heart


Sciences proved that electrical and magnetical field exist in human body.
Heart is a great generator of magnetic field rather than brain.
They both generates electric field.

I will try to compare trading to heart wave when someone is running.
This concept works the same with brain so pay attention.
When you start to run your heart’s frequency increases and when you stop your heart’s frequency returns to its constant/normal frequency.
Have you ever seen what happens when you run at a speed over certain limit?
Your heart’s frequency is higher and if you stop instantly your heart’s frequency doesn’t return instantly to its constant frequency, there is a delay.
Concrete example:
Constant/normal frequency when relaxed 50bpm;
Frequency when running 100bpm;
You stop instantly and heart’s frequency decreases from 100bpm to 50bpm in 1 second.
But if your frequency when you are running is 150bpm, when you stop instantly it doesn’t decrease in 1 second, it takes more time for example 5 seconds.
There is a delay in which your heart’s frequency is over your constant/normal frequency.
This happens only when your heart’s frequency goes over a certain value.

I can see the relation between this and trading but with a little difference, an electromagnetic wave moves like in a vacuum, there are not resistances to stop it so the only thing that can stop price to rise/fall is an opposite action.

Electromagnetic field doesn’t care about past, it cares of what’s happening in the present.
Cycles, fractals don’t care about past, they care of their present dimension but when its over they go over.
Multi-dimension world, we are dealing with a 2D dimension that is chart, so how do we see these multi-dimensions? I think that this gives the idea and it is not about timeframes, because if you change timeframe you change your point of view -> http://www.forexfactory.com/showthre...10#post3528310
What I am looking for are prooves of the effect or no-effect of time to trading.

Alex

[quote=JR97;8509673]{quote} I'm familiar with that gumball jar experiment. The Code episode 2 or something. I think that model has been applied to trading. Crowd sentiment. Sparkprofit.com and a few others I don't recall off the top of my head do that sort of thing..........

Yes, it was the Code......beautiful documentary.
Nice work your old system, thank you for showing the pic.

[quote=Copernicus;8509492]{quote} That's exactly right strongtrader. Science basically confirms your intuition. The reason why I love my science is that it gives me confidence in my decisions. It is my guiding benchmark for sanity. :-) PS The reason that I trade the longer term timeframe and keep away from scalping is the phenomenon of uncertainty (or noise). I don't won't to put you off in any way but thought I should mention why I deliberately use the longer timeframe. In terms of statistics, we attempt to define the gross behaviour of a system which means we are uncertain about the exact behaviour of every participant. The only way we can achieve this is through using a large sample size that attempts to define the entire population (or market)...............

Interesting arogument this one: although I agree with you on better trading higher time frames I would explain the why differently.
Market is a multidimensional fractal, so what happens on lower dimensions is the same of what happens on higher ones: a 20 pips move is the same on a daily chart and on a 5min chart; what changes is our perspective.
Indeed on the 5min chart 20 pips could be seen as the begining of a main wave menawhile on the daily they mean almost nothing.
The more you look at the smaller dimension the more you loose the right perspective.
So it's not a matter of noise but a matter of our mind, how a person looks at the charts can change everything.

It's not a matter of finding proves, it's a matter of understanding, conceiving, and believing.
Until you don't get rid of your old believes you won't see the rabbit hole even if you are right at the door....how can you open the door if you are not able to see it?

[quote=alexx90;8509786]

...........Multi-dimension world, we are dealing with a 2D dimension that is chart, so how do we see these multi-dimensions? I think that this gives the idea and it is not about timeframes, because if you change timeframe you change your point of view ..............

This is a good question....it is not important to see multidimensions, it is enough to think in 3D

It's an interesting point strongtrader.

Where my opinion subtly differs to yours however is that I view the market as 'fractal like' or reflects how a fractal pattern 'emerges' as a standard feature of evolving complexity, but not quite the same as detailed mature fractal patterns that we regularly we see in Nature. A fractal pattern emerges after time and requires extended timeframes.

Theoretical fractal patterns represent growth patterns along a scale continuum whereby the microscopic pattern is reflected in the macroscopic. We see it is physically manifest in non-living and living complex systems as majestic and mysterious beautiful pattern of nature..... as we are used to building things from a euclidean viewpoint in a reductionist 'assembly' manner. For example, when we build a house, we construct it from specific lengths of wood length and a pre-ordained arhitectural design as we use standard rulers and other measures and a pre-designated plan of scale to apply this to our construction.

In nature there is no access to absolutes such as rulers etc. that reflect a scale to build things in and it has no access 'generally' to 3rd party contructed bits so it does the best it can within the system it is contained. As a result the notion of scale is a relative concept, where relative means 'relative to the system'. Some exceptions exist however such as those animals that use pre-constructed elements in their design such as the 3rd party constructions seen with insect larve that use 'stolen' elements from other species and some other animals that occupy or use prior constructions developed by other lifeforms.

Living organisms 'grow' in a system as opposed to being 'constructed' or purpose built and this is a timely staged process and not simply an immediate construction based on a set of conditions at a specific time. The growth occurs through the progressive accumulation of energy associated with harvesting energy from their environment and this availability of energy (or food for example) is determined by the state of the environment. The resource availability to the living organism in a system manifests itself as a demand or a pull factor for resources where symptoms we are familiar with such as resource availability, competition etc. emerge. The finite resource availability to an organism in a competetive environment ultimately manifests itself with a gross feature applied to the system where a notion of 'survival of the fittest emerges'. Survival of the fittest applies to those lifeforms that achieve maximum efficiency in their system and hence survive to reproduce and extend that lifeforms existence in that environment.

This growth is a feature of evolving complexity and a staged process that adapts to the environment in which the organism resides. The 'evolving complexity' however once again is a 'blind' symptom of a complex changing enviornment and not a root cause where the actual fundamental reason is attributed to what is referred to as 'degrees of freedom' in a complex system. In a complex system there are less degrees of freedom than in a simple system and this reduced freedom shows itself up as system constraints. The constraints from degrees of freedom show themselves up in both non-living and living systems that evolve or grow but the persistence of design features are more overt in living systems. These constraints create 'form'.

These system constraints in complex systems apply very strict guidelines to how things can grow in scale and this is not determined from a prior blueprint but from the characteristics of the system itself which evolves over time. The DNA of a living organism controls expression of form but not scale....the environment does that task. That is why when you put goldfish into a fish bowl, they 'scale' to the fishbowl itself and in terms of other goldfish in the bowl. If you put them in a river, they 'scale' to that river and it's population. It is how finite resources of that system are most efficiently used by that system that determines the outcome.

Given that Nature has no access to absolutes such as rulers or 3rd party constructions, and given the varying degrees of freedom allowed for in complex systems, nature chooses the simplest method in design to grow over time. It uses a simple pattern and repeats....again and again and again...resulting in fractal patterns. You see it in all Natures forms in both living and non-living systems. It is not a 'directed' or 'sentient' design but just the most parsiminous system of design and construction that works in terms of an evolving form in a complex system. Dependent on system resource availability or specfically degrees of freedom, growth can stop at any time which is reflective at that moment in time of 'maximum' system efficiency but like equilibrium in an open system, the benchmark continuously changes.

So now to the markets. The fractal nature of price only appears genuinely in the longer timeframes. Why? Unlike natural fractal patterns where the pattern appears to be seen at all scales along a scale spectrum from the microscopic to the grandest of scales, a market clearly has a commencement point where the most fundamental unit is 'the tick'. Fractal patterns which are a symptom of growth in system complexity emerge over time and cannot be seen immediately a system is created. The degrees of freedom of boundary constraints only emerge over time as an indicator of how the system expresses itself. It is never immediately apparrent as it takes time for order to emerge in a system and reflect the constraints which apply to it's constituents and thereby co-ordinate collective behaviour.

If you trade close to the timeframe of 'the tick' make sure that what you are trading 'is' a fractal' and not simply a random pattern. Like an 'edge' in this market, it is incredibly difficult to distinguish between random patterns and non-random system directed patterns. Visually there is only a very few ways to distringuish what is real and what is random. Once again use statistics as your friend to distringuish the difference and not your eyes. You need data of a sample drawn from the system that is sufficiently representative of that system to determine if there is any potential 'reason' for that pattern difference or whether that pattern is simply a random fluctuation in a complex system.

The simple fundamental reason why it is almost impossible to distinguish between random patterns and non-random patterns is that complexity builds organised structures from chaotic systems. Randomness is the pre-requisite for complexity....if this makes sense. The study of how complexity emerges in complex systems is referred to in science as Chaos theory which is a branch of thermodynamics with fractals being forms of dissipative structures, and an understanding of organised complexity is a very helpful pragmatic basis on which to approach this market.

PS. We need to be careful in our definition of randomness here. Order emerges from chaos actually does not mean that it originates from 'pure' randomness. Chaotic systems are actually complex and not random. In fact perfect randomness is a feature that is not evident in our classical world. It is only evident in how the quantum domain interacts with the classical world. When talking in terms of randomness in terms of classical systems, what we mean is 'undefined' simply due to the fact that we don't have the ability to calculate the behaviour of every participant in ths system. As discussed previously, this is the job of thermodynamics in describing a systems behaviour by its 'gross' collective features.

For example, look at the following video demonstration of different coloured dyes mixing in glycerine. If we have perfect knowledge of the behaviour of all the dye molecules and the constraints applied by the medium plus the dye (system), then we could exactly predict the outcome. The problem is that what appears random (such as the equilibrium state after the dye has been completely dissipated through the glycerine = higher entropy state) is actually still ordered. It is just a different state of form where grouping order is replaced by symmetry order. Look at what happens when we reverse the direction of the process but towards grouping order (lower entropy). In the same way, we need to view randomness in markets this way. The equilibrium state is complex but not actually random in the pure definition of the word. More info of my viewpoint regarding this discussion is here.



Does randomness actually exist in our classical reality? (not quantum but classical) I would wager it doesn't. I think we get confused when talking of randomness in classical systems as it is simply a feature of complexity. In my classical worldview the universe was created from nothing, but my definition of nothing would be different to conventional viewpoint. I view nothing as no-'things' as opposed to what is 'absent'. For example, get every thing in this universe such as suns, planets, and 'stuff' and put it into a hypothetical blender until it is thoroughly disseminated and mixed and in an equilibium state of perfect symmetry. In this state 'things' don't exist as to be a 'thing' you need to be able to define it in a system context. It does not mean that stuff is absent, it is just that we can't define it as a 'seperate existence'. You can only define a 'thing' relative to another 'thing'. Note that in quantum systems, there is no such 'thing' as a 'thing'. We only have a probability distribution associated with the ability/potential to create a thing from a distributed wavefunction via collapse. After we have blended the classical universe, everything is however still there however rather than being absent from the system it is just in a different state. This is how I view the evolution of a classical universe, Namely a progresive change of state in which 'things' emerge dependent on which part of the system you are viewing. That way when talking about a universe from nothing, I can reconcile how order/things/laws emerges from this system without the requirement for a divine creator. I personally worship a creator that in my classical worldview are the 'altered states' of this universe.

Is this a joke? "it's a matter of understanding, conceiving, and believing".
I have a proof about no-influence of time on trading, but what about influence of time on trading? Where is the proof that time is relevant, that market is based on time?
Prooves are very important in defining a path.

[quote=strongtrader;8509951] If you think in 3D you are slave of your subjectivity. You need some tools to see this matrix, to know where you are.

Hmmmm......if you have the proof that time does not affect price, why the heck are you looking for the opposite proof?!
Let me joke just a bit: there is the serious risk the day you will find the proofs you are looking for, market economy will be just a memory of the past....

[quote=Copernicus;8510032]{quote} It's an interesting point strongtrader. Where my opinion subtly differs to yours however is that I view the market as 'fractal like' or reflects how a fractal pattern 'emerges' as a standard feature of evolving complexity, but not quite the same as detailed mature fractal patterns that we regularly we see in Nature. A fractal pattern emerges after time and requires extended timeframes...............



Well, what to say? Each of your posts is a masterpiece.
Yes, most of the people end up with chaos everytime they cannot understand something, for the priority is not finding the solution but feeding their egos; this is one of the many ways our mind works against us.
Coming to trading, you’re correct, at the tick dimension there still is no shape and that is for this is point zero, the point at which there is no space, no time, it is the “no-thing”.
So your conclusion is that the more I scale up on higher dimensions the bigger is the aggregation of data I can process to find the correct market shape that will take place in the next future.

All your reasoning is correct and I agree each single word, but the conclusions you can get are more then one.
Your strategy is based upon historical data in the assumption that the market will follow the same path, at least for a certain period in time: now this would be a perfect system if the energy that is animating the evolution of price would be constant, but that is not the case; money flow (that is the energy in market system) is not constant, so although you can find similarities with what has happened in the past, it never repeats the same. It will differ in motion therefore in space and time.
This does not mean you cannot obtain right informations quite often - let’s say around 60-65% ? - and they are enough to be profitable with an appropriate risk management and discipline, but there is a lot of work to do.
So it is not my intention to criticize your point of view, the theory is perfectly logic, but there are some weak aspects that have no solutions without changing perspective.

Now I’d like you to consider another point of view and please express your considerations about it.
We have two edges:
The first is that market was born a long time ago, not one tick ago, so we already have a shape we can see.
We also know the more we scale up the clearer is the shape and, this is important, the slower it will change; and what is evolving within it will be constrained, to a certain degree, in the actual shape we are seeing.
The second edge is the only constant that is present in the market and everywhere else, in any system from the micro dimension to the macro dimension and to the universal dimension, and I’m not going to tell it here (but I’m sure you and a few others here know very well).
Given those two edges, if then we scale down we can know with a high degree precision not what will happen but what is happening in the now and what is going to happen in the immediate next now; and this is just what we really need to trade.
The information we get allows us to follow the actual shape and to adapt to its changings in the moment they occur: to do this we do not need complicated calculations and analysis, everything is provided just by observation.

I would add that there is a big “BUT”: we do need to know how the full “monster” works and we do need to re-educate our mind to think “different”, getting rid of all our biases and of our tendencies to see things with Euclidian geometry, and least but not last getting rid of our ego.
Trading is first of all a state of mind.

The famous Cartesio said two very important statements:
- cogito ergo sum;
- science must have to do with matter, philosophy must have to do with spirit.
Let me say this man, with these two simple statements, has f***ed the whole world for eons.

Awesome response S. The beauty of our discussion is that we are both learning from each other. I must admit, I am only just now getting to better understand the 'now'. You are far ahead of me in this learning curve. Not the now in terms of that microscopic fine line that seperates the future and the past, but the expanded now that occurs through 'awareness' of the actual reality (the monster you refer to) that we all find so difficult to put into abstract thoughts or words.

We are so fond of abstracting what we think as the reality, but that abstract incarnation is simply our thoughts speaking which is merely an amalgam of our experiences....."Cogito ergo sum" basically sums up this proposition. The ego associated with the illusion of reality brings with it so much baggage and is the wrecking ball that prevents most of us (me especially) from trading the now. To trade the 'now'.....yes I am with you on this but that takes a different spin on things and I am only a novice.

I have mentioned elsewhere that I am actually a poor trader and that is why I use a crutch such as statistics to lean on. Fortunately it appears that this is sufficient to get me through. There are however still a lot of biases I need to shed before I can truly 'see' the market and trade it using the discretionary method, but at least with awareness of the potential of this capability, I think that is perhaps the major obstacle of which I have almost overcome.

I really appreciate these discussions S and others participating in this thread. I must admit I came to this thread with a pre-conceived bias that was counterproductive in engaging debate....but soon realised that the problem lay with me and not the participants here. Discussions like this are very fruitful and while philosophical in design, really makes the old grey matter tick over. There is so much 'fact' thrown around this forum, it is hard to see the wood for the trees. The art of letter writing where the aim is to define a context and then stimulate creative thought is slowly dying regretfully which therefore makes discussion and discourse so stilted and bereft of meaning. That is why threads such as this really appeal to me.

Cheers

Well, thank you.....
I appreciate too this discussion, it's going like every discussion should go, the purpose is right to learn from each other: very rare in FF, a lot of pretenders spiting rubbish and fighting for their ego.
Yes, ego is the biggest problem; although is important for each of us because it supports our self-preservation instinct, it often prevails on our true self, which is our true thinking mind where resides intuition.
It is necessary to re-educate our ego and make it to go back in its proper place staying silent until we really need it;
then there are some other issues that are specific of our mind, like habits and emotions: they all together blindfold the mind power we have which could allow each of us to do what ever we want to do.
It is a very strange phenomenon, like if we would have two minds, each one fighting against the other.
Human mind is an incredibly powerfull tool but we need to learn to use it and manage it properly, otherwise it will transform in our worst enemy; it is very hard for most of the people getting aware of this, and I think it is the consequence of the conditioning processes and wrong education that have taken place expecially in our Occidental world since the far past.
Politics power and religions power have made incredible damages.
Oriental phylosophies are much more near the truth, we have a lot to learn from them, really a lot.
This is what I mean when I say "re-educate your mind", "think different" etc.; once you understand this you can begin your path towards yourself and you will find you are not what you were thinking to be, but don't get scared of that because you will see something very special.
At that moment you will also understand what is the Now and at that moment you will start to "think different" and you will see what you are able to do in the Now.

BTW. you gave a very good definition of it......"awareness of the actual reality"......I would add that you can reach that kind of awareness only walking on the thin line that separates the future from the past: upon that thin line there is the expaned Now which is infinite.
Does this surprise you? Well, think for a while how many times in a day do you feel you are merged with what you are doing so that you loose the awarness of time going by, of your environment, even of your wife speaking to you (LOL!)?
And instead, how many times you are doing something while thinking to what you have to do after, getting angry with yourself for your mistakes, thinking to what has happened yesterday, to what will happen tomorrow?
How many times do you think to the result you desire from what you are doing in the present?
All this thinking makes you weaker more and more, it absorbes your power, it brings to you all that you do not want.
Results are just the natural consequences of what you are really doing in the here and now: success is the natural result of a work done giving your best in the present moment.
If you chase success, it will run out of you, success must be attracted; the same is with money.
If you are thinking to the result you are not giving your best, because the most part of your energy is in the future and not in the now.....the thin line.
All this in trading is enormously amplified because you are alone with yourself: there is no one to take your responsibility, there is no excuse, there is no forgiving for your mistakes, there is no illusion of control and there is money, there are your hopes, your desires on one side and on the other side there is risk, fear, greed, all your emotions.....all this is a royal dinner for your ego which will get fat, heavy and cumbersome more and more each day....
In "The legend of Bagger Vance" there is a beautiful statement that I would transfer to trading too: "Trading (golf) is not a game at which you can win, you can only play it". This does not mean you cannot make a lot of money with it.

Here are two mile stones that will help you a lot:
Mindful trading: mastering your emotions and the inner game - J. Rande Howell
The power of now - Ekhart Tolle

Have a nice week end you all.

i feel confusion in some opinions.
the natural laws do not necessarily explain how and why markets move/operate for a simple reason that actually markets are ruled by laws of behavior. natural laws and behavioral laws are two completely different creatures, therefore any attempts to apply the characteristics of one to another is illogical. greatest example of this fallacy is attempts to apply Fibonacci sequence to markets.
i admire every post about how things work in nature, fractals, magnetic/electric fields, thermodynamics, vibrations and so on and read them with great interest. i also think the core of everything is the vibration (energy), which forms the strings (strings form the protons/neutrons, and then atoms and so on). however, when we find out what that fundamental vibration exactly is, it will open a door to another world. No doubt, these are very interesting topics, which unfortunately will not and can not make much contribution to become profitable in markets. and again, i am saying this because we are ignoring the fact that market conditions are not ruled by the natural laws, but behavioral laws, of which we know absolutely nothing and most of the time we just ignore that such laws even may exist
happy weekend guys.

PS. Copernicus, just by reading your last few posts, i thought you may find the following reading useful. it is comments for an Andalusian sufi, mystic and philosopher Ibn Arabi's one of prominent works (written in 12th century). His thoughts about god, universe and human are eye opening and fit well to our modern world, invention of the quantum world.
http://www.sacred-texts.com/isl/siim/siim16.htm#fr_471

Thanks tash. Both you and strongtrader have now armed me with some good reading material to get my teeth into. Looking forward to a few 'lazy weekends' where I can relax and absorb them.

......much appreciated



PS BANG!!!!!! That hit me over the head with a sledge hammer. You are right of course. How to get into everyone's heads to then understand their behaviour.....now that's a neat solution. Better still is how to get into the fundamental head from which all other heads are derived :-)

Jusr re-reading your post S and noticing the need for a clean slate (tabula rasa) when attempting to understand the reality. Couldn't agree with you more. It is interesting that for much of my early life I never did 'think' about what was in my head. I had a manufactured mind, not a thinking mind. It took a literal mind wipe to allow me to start again and use 'accumulated knowledge' to piece my world together again on my own terms (not others)......but how powerful! The bliss of 'coherent thought' allows you to become master of your universe which makes you omnipotent. While my change of mind was 'induced' by some shady practices I can see how through careful practice, one could achieve the same state without the accelerants and it is only through peering into other cultures that you suddenly realise that 'this is known' by many and just forms an accepted part of life. To westerners like me, this has literally blown me away. Yes I have long been aware of the different veiwpoints between cultures but I have never really attempted to take these alternate views on board. In fact my deep journey into science was an attempt to dis-prove these barmy viewpoints, but in the process of actually understanding science, no matter how hard you try and keep away from these philosophical interpretations.....all roads lead to Rome so to speak, Acceptance has been a big issue with me until only very recently. The search for answers takes many branches which all ultimately converge.

I have been asleep for just soooooooooooo long. It's time to wake up and smell the roses and I will enjoy reading your suggestions, particularly Eckhardt Tolle's as I already the 'might river in the rainforest' sending me a copy as we speak.

PS My personal favourite thinker.

Hi CrucialPoint,

I had been pondering on your post for some time but the idea didn't come on immediately, literally it took me days (non-trading days) when this sudden idea struck me. Pls help to clarify my thoughts and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, thanks in advance.

"CrucialPoint you idiot!... there is no difference from drawing those lines on the chart versus those strings on the screen!!!" There is actually difference between drawing lies on the chart vs using physical strings to function as lines on the monitor.

On 1st thought, I couldn't really figure it out as there will indeed be no difference in the display initially. Because if you draw the lines on the chart, no matter where you move, the lines will appear on the candlestick in the same place. But using your string method, when u move the chart, the physical fixed strings(lines) will be shown differently depending on your x-axis displacement.

The difference will only be relevant when u Grab the chart with your mouse and simply move it around. WALLA!!!... Gann's angles on 3D.
Simply put, you are actually changing your grid or reference point whenever the x-axis is changed, therefore the lines/grid becomes dynamic and not static anymore. Any Lines/Trendlines (horizontal, vertical, diagonal) can be your grid or your reference point if you choose.

That's because I haven't explained it. Peace, CrucialPoint [/quote]

Q) How do you make use of this constantly changing Dynamic Lines/Grid/Reference Points to any trading advantage. I would greatly appreciate it if you can explain it, Many thanks to you, CrucialPoint. Pls kindly explain it, peace.

SideTrack because I saw the Spiral gif - How does this spiral DNA structure helps us in trading? It can be seen on our human bodies too. These structures can be seen in Medical Society symbol, the way it runs in our human bodies near the spine too. Is there some secret or conspiracy that the medical society knows but didn't tell us and is there some secret based on the universe or humans or the way markets actually move in a spiral helical way?



Thanks & Best Regards,
LearnAlways