Green lines even when price is declining, I like that!
Escher charting. And I think the initial spike is supposed to have a little bit of time warping gangsta lean.
Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 28027. (Read 26712678 times)
April 25, 2014, 09:48:08 AM
Green lines even when price is declining, I like that!
Escher charting. And I think the initial spike is supposed to have a little bit of time warping gangsta lean.
April 25, 2014, 09:46:02 AM
Next up is a small rise on low volume until we hit 7am european time and we get another massive dump...
April 25, 2014, 09:44:51 AM
I do not know what the price will be but the log brownian model does NOT say that (I am just repeating myself here) ...
Look at a call closed formula price, N(d2) represents the probability of the call being in the money, if you put S=K (our example here) you are left with N(something negative) which means that the probability that the price ends up above current value is ... less than 50% !
And below current value is ... more than 50%.
Look at a call closed formula price, N(d2) represents the probability of the call being in the money, if you put S=K (our example here) you are left with N(something negative) which means that the probability that the price ends up above current value is ... less than 50% !
And below current value is ... more than 50%.
I don't understand your notation, here is mine
Basically, in the log-Brownian model the difference between successive values of Z(i) = log(P(i)) are independent random variables with probability distributions that are symmetric about zero. Therefore after any number n of steps the probability distribution of Z(i+n) will be symmstric about the starting value Z(i). That means Z(i+n) wil be less than Z(i) with 50% probability. Since log is monotonic, it preserves cumulative probabilities, therefore P(i+n) will be less than P(i) with 50% probability. What is wrong with this argument?
(Strictly speaking, "Brownian" requires a normal distribution of increments with zero mean and fixed variance. In practice the variance varies slowly and the distributions have fatter tails than the norma; but by the law of large numbers they become near-normal for large n.)
My notation is the standard financial notation as found under wikipedia black-scholes article (S=spot price, K=strike ...). So now you have my notation please take a look at my argument again.
To come back to yours, I think the error is in the first sentence : "the difference between successive values of Z(i) = log(P(i)) are independent random variables with probability distributions that are symmetric about zero"
Small proof: under log brownian (with no drift) the important basic concept is that the best expectation of price in the future is the current value of the price. Your hypothesis does not respect that.
For instance let's say Pi=exp(1) so Z(i)=1, now we simulate a 1 step tree with 50% chance of going up 0.1 and 50% chance of going down 0.1 to simplify (doesnt change the result), and we compute Expectation[P(i+1)] which should be equal to exp(1). Well, Expectation[P(i+1)]=0.5*exp(1.1)+0.5*exp(0.9) which is not exp(1).
Also you can ask any bank quant, under simple log brownian mode, an at the money binary option (pays 1 if stock is above, 0 below) its theoretical price is strictly less than 0.5, which is exactly the probability of ending above current value, which is also exactly the value of the N(d2) I mentioned in my post before.
April 25, 2014, 09:38:29 AM
Green lines even when price is declining, I like that!
April 25, 2014, 09:37:40 AM
Quality TA. AAA+++. Would post again in risto's thread.
April 25, 2014, 09:36:04 AM
I am getting more and more the feeling that we are getting played by the Chinese.
April 25, 2014, 09:36:00 AM
I scrolled up but couldn't see where your second candle ends. Try to log your graph? Or do you need to log-star it?
I put it in log scale and it still bounded at the same point on the upside.
April 25, 2014, 09:33:31 AM
April 25, 2014, 09:32:24 AM
I scrolled up but couldn't see where your second candle ends. Try to log your graph? Or do you need to log-star it?
April 25, 2014, 09:28:00 AM
April 25, 2014, 09:21:07 AM
We will stabalize @ 447-502 for a shot time (hours) before dropping quickly to ~ 408 where serious resistance will be met.
Is this a fact?
Not yet. It is an opinion based on analysis.
So far it's close to on target. After an attempt at consolidation here we see a second sharp downturn. This is a good spot to log some puts..
I tend to agree although I dont expect a full retracement, tops 485. short target 420 short term.
I think you may be more accurate here. Perhaps in part this is true because the market is starting to desensitize to the china trick a bit.
April 25, 2014, 09:18:33 AM
Although if you look closely, you'll see it's a V2 !
Which is a rocket. Smartarse.
April 25, 2014, 09:17:22 AM
Although if you look closely, you'll see it's a V2 !
April 25, 2014, 09:15:25 AM
April 25, 2014, 09:13:57 AM
April 25, 2014, 09:12:24 AM
Our pictures are diverse and multi-faceted, thank you very much! 
Awesome !
April 25, 2014, 09:12:18 AM
It's so straight...
April 25, 2014, 09:10:48 AM
Look at that guys... 3 green hourly candles in a row... Time to unironically start posting those rockets huh 
don't look at the volume though that'll only ruin the fun
don't look at the volume though that'll only ruin the fun
April 25, 2014, 09:03:11 AM
8 green bars on stamp/15m..
another bulltrap?
btw, was it a fart that propelled the bull in that picture???
another bulltrap?
btw, was it a fart that propelled the bull in that picture???
April 25, 2014, 09:01:35 AM
apparently not only the sunlot is trying to propose a plan to resurrect Gox, but Okcoin too.
Got a source to the OKcoin story?
Im sure there will be something more official but just IRC atm, apparently Okcoin were creditors as well so have a vested interest, appartenly the Sunlot people were trying to make a deal with Mark to buy the company before it all broke but it sounds like a very shady deal from the Mark and Sunlot perspective.
OKCoin certainly makes sense with the China ban situation.
Jump to: