Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 27467. (Read 26709727 times)

it seems reasonable, we can call it whatever we want. soul is as good a word as any.

it does seem that there needs to be some kind of outward influence though.

or inward even, as it feels like this influence manifests itself though our actions?

Why do people erect these walls?

some one is really trying to hold the price down.. this shits just guna explode once that wall is knocked isnt it.

Btc-E is ready, Seems very bullish.

Now we Need those walls taken down.

It's not like you have a choice, right?

Explanation

How did it go back to 620 with that wall up again so fast? Did that guy dump exactly the right amount to be able to put that wall up there again? This happened in no time.

I spell it sole, and I've got two.

I can't stop dancing, I'm not sure where my soles should rest.

While it does generally make sense to work in dollar amounts since it is more stable (Chartbuddy does this for depth scaling) , it should probably be taken into account that while bitcoin value is increasing, the value of the dollar is also decreasing (albeit at a slower rate)

New wall. Jesus Christ.

if that is true then there is a non-local hidden variable.  let's just agree right now to call it the soul, to save time.

And a new 600+btc ask wall is back...

DISH network news is just unbelievable!! ====> watch as more U.S. corporations jump on the bandwagon!!! =))))) weee

predictable or probabilistic?  ;-)

This is precisely why I don't believe in the concept of free will.

Humans are too complex to model, but in the long run we won't be.

Apologies another time for my confusing phrasing. In your quote of me above, I refer to 'fiat volume', independent of what exact fiat currency the respective exchange trades with.

And I was refering to this statement:


If $volume would indeed be required to increase linearly with price, we would expect to see constant BTCvolume. We don't: BTCvolume gently declines over time. And I agree with Peter that this is only to be expected.


The other time when I mentioned "USD", I meant BTCvolume on those exchanges that trade against USD in particular. In other words, I dismiss Euro and CNY in the analysis.

Someone got tired of that wall.

Absolutely not. A simulation would typically rely on the basic laws of physics, not complex solutions for particular situations.

Coming back to (xbt) volume one more time: here's a (very draft-y) motivation for my claim that I want to see eventually 300k xbt volume on the USD exchanges over three days... although that demand is perhaps a bit too high, on second thought: I demand 3 "perfect" days with 100k volume in a row -- I should revisit the exact claim.

Anyway, despite agreeing above with Peter R.'s observation that we don't need an increase in USD volume by factor x to support a price increase of factor x, there still seems to be some surprisingly constant (across vastly different price regimes) definition of 'high volume' periods, denominated in Bitcoin. That value seems to be somewhere above 100k coins per day, and until that patterns turns out to be broken in the future, I expect it to hold and will keep it in mind when judging how sustainable I consider a rally.

Here's a chart summing up volume over stamp and gox, over the past two years. Not added yet: finex and btc-e, so the values to the right are somewhat too low. Note that during the run-up to 1200, summed xbt volume spiked to above 100k several times.





There is another view (don't have it on this computer) where it becomes more clear that there is clearly a downwards trend in raw xbt volume over different price eras. My claim here however is that high volume "100k days" appear to be remarkably constant across periods (at least so far)

EDIT: just to be clear, I don't expect 100k+ volume days right now. During the late-2013 rally, they also appeared only rather late, from the SR crash onwards.

So my point isn't that I miss those high volume days during the current phase of the rally, but that because those days are still missing, we aren't in the phase of the rally yet that marks the run-up to a new ATH. I know, I know: duh!


EDIT 2: Maybe not so 'duh' after all... (from another thread)


That's exactly my point: no chance in hell. Bring on a few real spikes in volume, like the aforementioned 100k days, and we'll talk.

Yawn, someone just buy that wall already  

Was hoping for abit more movement this weekend...