-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote from jack hershey: the volume 8 cases are: P1, T1, P2, T2P, T2F, NOT T2P, NOT T2P, and P3F I see 7 here. Could you describe briefly what each of them means? P stands for peak. T stands for trough. 1 stands for first. 2 stands for second. A third letter P is Pass (True) and a third letter F is False (Fail) It looks like I did my usual typo. The one that appears twice is actually what you expect. Change one of the T2P's to T2F. All of these pieces become the parts of The Pattern". Please post the sketch or the drafted version. Written out the Order Of Events becomes: Peak 1, Trough 1, peak 2, Trough 2 pass, trough 2 Fail, NOT trough 2 Pass, NOT trough 2 Fail. and Peak 3 Fail. In logic, there are expressions and operators. A true expression has no modifier. When an expression is the opposite, then a modifier is used. The modifier conventionally chosen is "NOT". If logic circuitry is in use by and electrical engineer and an expression of the "NOT nature is needed, the engineer inserts an inverter, An inverter takes a regular input an makes it the opposite. For volume cases, do you compare a volume bar to its prior volume bar? I keep mentioning an approach which I type as RDBMS. SQL and Haskell are such. The APL was developed using two 360's back to back at UCSC; IBM ran an APL operation within UCSC in Philadelphia. Wharton was prt of Penn and Penn ws one of the 26 members of the UCSC consortium. I ran two divisions there at UCSC at that time. So I got to stick my head in once and a while. My background is as a free floating Problem Solver in the design of large computers their hardware and their philosophy. For what ever reason it was discovered I could look at "D" size logic flow, commit it to memory immediately and then metally trouble shoot ant logis schema relative to its strategic implementation range of applications. Rather than talk to designers and developers it was determined I would present packaged solutions to them and they would go about learning what I did as a fix. I was vry youthful looking and as a consequence it was difficult to face off with a person who made some E or O. What are your criterion? I wrote out in cells of 22 tables all the math for SQL. Later I converted all this stuff to another platform. I am typing out this conversion so a library become in existance. The criteria is shown in "The Pattern" implicitely. I can't say that I have a pt 1 on this price bar and thus the volume bar case associated with this price bar is P1. It is crucial to become knowledgeable about the Order Of Events of variables. I feel that if a person knows this, then he has an advantage. So far, I have used this matter to differentiate people. Also I have been taught to not care about other people. If a person is reasonable enough, he can "get it". the record is clear about those who do and those who don't. Your statement above cannot be made nor used for anything. It is true that during a bar for price and during its corresponding bar for volume, that "The Pattern" occurs as drawn or sketched. In the Scientific Method's use a deduction can be drawn. All I did ws go through a system and complete it in terms of all its parts, all the connecting operators and all the subsystems of relationships within the egis of a RDBMS. By doing so, I would be wrongfully adding price as a leading factor in defining volume cases. Right? You are correct that you would be making a mistake. It is vey important to learn how to determine you are making a mistake. Secondly it is very important to determine what the replacement is for refraining from making a mistake. Fortunately all the theory of various approaches have been proven systematically in the various fields and disciplines. there is no new ground to cover in market theory. It is easily possible to critique each of the mistken approaches that sre presently not performing to any extent.
The End Effect, I annotate at all times is P3P as a class; to be clear about an End Effect precisely, I go further and use subsets. Is P3P another volume case? Yes. It has 35 sub cases in acollection of sub sets. I reviewed the subset PP already. I also outline the character of other subsets somewhat. In the volume 8 cases you see a two letter and a three letter diffrentiation. I see some cases are one letter one number, two letters one number, and two letters one number and a NOT. I use two letters in the trading fractal. When I get to the last price move (move 3), I letter according to the subfractal of the move 3. There you see 4 more cases. So this means there are four trading fractal cases and 4 sub fractal cases. this is a consistency. The common element is T2P. It would be T2 for the trading frctal, but I use T2P instead because it keeps me alert and on the ball. As you see the End Effect is the lst peak of the newtrend roughly It is P3P (35 diffrentiable elements), BUT the P3P can also be a failure to end the trend. When such,I name this P3F once I learned that every bar has to have a name. ??? daring has cited an authority who wrote a book that he believes is a good book. Anyone who chooses can write. Anyone who chooses can read. this is a proof of two wrongs do not make a write. you're citing moves. 2 is to in your citation. I am citing cases which are names of elements in sequence. We are both wrote. Hope I have helped to bridge both of you. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- It may be possible to see trends in parallelograms for price and a corresponding "tree" for the possible volume combinations. Once you have completed ll the possibilities by deduction, then it is easy to reframe the system in any form. I depend upon the techings and observations of Tufte to the extreme. He has really articulted just how my mind can work and do things. A movie also illustrated the working on another unusual mind. I did gt to go to Princeton weekly when I was in high school. Others came too and we were a group that was exposed to the staff at the advanced studies center where the movie took place. So we went through presentations field by field and got acquainted with systemmic thinking. Because of my finacial situation, I had little money, no scholarships and the erroneous belief that I could not owe money to anyone. I worked a lot in college and I cut back on meals and was quite frail. But I did, stupidly pay my way through a couple of degrees and then was IBM's guest for theoretical physics. So I so SA in a PS context. my first biggies were putting in fixes on the 702 and 705 series. Before that I wrote up solutions on Reeves analogs and GE differential analyzers and other primative computers, all at the RPI Computer Lab
this thred, entitled "bottom" was the usual ET anomally. Most people are not empowered to more than guess about anything in markets. Handball is played in cubical like container. there is only one moving target besides the ball: your playing opponent. VN got in his way mostly. Or as in tennis, he hit him with the ball. The rest is geometry. Price is free floating independent of an axis. Volume is anchored and always begins at the same locus slipped laterally to the future. granularity kills all but few solutions with one fell swoop. No ones gets this apparently. I wrote thousands of pages and ordred them into a flow for every conceivable aspect of a market. I sifted for about forever. At some point it was in my head and available enough that I could "read" in the language of the combined market variables. So the "call" in the thread was during a trend an inside a bar. A person was making a mistake.
Makes sense. And there is the leading indicator for the FTT: volume peak. It can be so simple when JH is not explaining it. :eek:
Thanks for the comment. You sound like a smart guy. I hope that you can SEE the formation sequences of volume peak, bar to bar as well as intra-bar.
I tend to trade things that are so illiquid (VERY granular) compared to what everyone else is looking at, those fancy prorated volume bars probably wouldn't help me. But this is great - JH posts in tongues to obscure the Holy Fractal from the unworthy eyes of doubters. That pattern that you posted matches what I keep seeing when I use Elliot wave combined with channeling.
Sometimes when I get sick with price and volume chart, I trade illiquid market for relaxation and pennies. DOM window is all I ever need to watch. Life is simpler as elephants are all over stomping on the screen. You have a problem with that fancy dodgy-blue pro-rata volume bar? Not kidding for your intelligence?! Let me share with you a money-making secret about it. I memorize the values through out 300-second interval. Hope it rings a bell for you. Jack is too old for it, LOL. You son of the bitch! I thought I was the only one who had discovered the link of that pattern to Elliot waves. Apparently you are more advanced than me. I think those hopeless forever JHM beginners like ocean5 are dying you will share with them the insight.
It's an old idea, right out of the EW text book. . . Obvious to open eyes. I started with EW and surprise! SCT fits right into The Order of The Market (E waves are very complex fractals)