Wow, this is news to me! I always thought Quants were all about the mean-reversion, not forecasting underlying price movements outright. i'm no math genius, but seems very holy-grail no? i'm gonna have to read up on my butterfly effect
Go to Mandelbrot's website, http://www.math.yale.edu/mandelbrot/ and follow the various links. I suggest reading everything Mandelbrot wrote about finance, going all the way back to his very first papers, such as "The Variation of Certain Speculative Prices", which he published in 1963. This would be a lot of math intensive reading, but I think it is worthwhile. If you have trouble with the math, then at least try to read those of his publications directed toward lay or less mathematically sophisticated audiences. I believe that these are specifically identified on his website.
Well, I'm not a quant, and I don't think this is a typical quant-type activity, not shown are the error bounds on my forecast which implies a distribution with increasing large variance as time moves forward, so I'm forecasting smoothed price change density and not the actual price process.
lol more like watching in amusement while you quote things you really don't know about and feeling so proud of it while faking humbleness. nice
nicholaf, you are giving stephencrowley too much credit. He never quoted anything. He made various claims as to what Mandelbrot, Takens, and other scientists wrote, but the real truth is that those scientists never wrote those things, and in fact contradicted crowley's claims. I challenged crowley to provide exact quotations from published literature, to support his contentions as to what the scientists said, but crowley never posted a single quote.
lol hey man, whatever makes you feel better about yourself, maybe I really don't know any of this stuff, but as long as my formulas and code keep working like they do then I'm fine with it. I know you are trying to hassle me so that I'll eventually crack and give away some of the secrets, but it's not gonna happen.