this is an answer I made to an email >Hi Harry! Have started reading about Gann. Are your equations >describing growth/decay exponentially? It seems Gann tried >that. >"when price squares time..." >Have you read about the law of octaves? >I have seen markets geometry in realtime now. Fascinating! >I read some of your views of time at elitetrader. That time is an >illusion. Do you know what theoretical physicians say about >this? They mean it canÂ´t be an illusion if itÂ´s the 4:th dimension? Gann's approach is like astronomer's approach before Newton: they didn't knew that the cause was gravitation so they could only use DESCRIPTIVE geometry to do so. Descriptive approach is the first step but you don't know the cause. The geometry of planets is an ARTEFACT (effect) of Newton's law, it is not the geometry by itself that moves the planet: the same for stock market people who think is driven by geometry are wrong, geometry is the visible manifestation of the invisible cause. You can't see Newton's equation as it is abstract you see the geometry of planets orbits. It is not evident to deduce this invisible cause from the geometry or anybody before Newton would have done so. The same for market's equation: it is not evident to deduce them by observing the geometry. My underlying equations fixed price, and because of geometry then time is also fixed. So if time is squared with price it is once again an artefact. As time as 4th dimension, one must not confuse PHYSICAL DIMENSION with MATHEMATICAL DIMENSION. You can always invent a mathematical dimension it doesn't mean that it is a physical dimension. As Einstein puts it time only exists because things cannot occur simultaneously. I would say the same as for time in stock market. Ideally for market's efficiency as futures is known it is always discounted in present (this is the basics of financial theory of interest rate) but because price cannot be multiple at one time it has to move at different time (This is just an image don't take it litterally). So I consider that Gann has something interesting point of view but it is not scientifically based so I never read his things because I consider that it is too fuzzy and that I have already too busy with my own stuffs. Also I'm not a mystic guy and filtering all his mysticism bothers me . Now if you want to study him I encourage you to do.