Brownian motion (i.e. Wiener processes) does display self-similarity, and in that respect he is right. But periodicity is a much stronger condition, which I do not believe holds.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
[quote]Rational Gaze wrote:
What you’re saying is that you approximate an arbitrary subset of the graph with a parabola, then infer properties of the original graph from this approximation? How is that useful?
And no, it’s not nonsense, I suggest you go and read about mathematical finance if you need to convince yourself why it isn’t.[/quote]
This 10 years of data is not arbitrary, its the past 10 years.
[/quote]
OK, how about I fit a straight line to the first five years and then claim that the value of gold will increase at a constant rate.
You guys are making it way too complicated. Get a calculator and type in the values, do a Quad Reg.
People who overcomplicate things unnecessarily work at the Fed, and look where that got us.
And who gives a rat’s ass what happened 20 years ago to the gold price?
Linear regression? WTF? Your cc would be something like .65.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
a periodic function?
That is a bold statement and I am sure the Noble panel would love to read your dissertation.[/quote]
how is that a bold statement? I’m saying that the price of gold goes up and down infinitely many times.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
You guys are making it way too complicated. Get a calculator and type in the values, do a Quad Reg.
People who overcomplicate things unnecessarily work at the Fed, and look where that got us.
And who gives a rat’s ass what happened 20 years ago to the gold price?
Linear regression? WTF? Your cc would be something like .65.[/quote]
You either don’t get it, or are trolling. I’ll leave you to your idiotic thread.
[quote]thefederalist wrote:
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
a periodic function?
That is a bold statement and I am sure the Noble panel would love to read your dissertation.[/quote]
how is that a bold statement? I’m saying that the price of gold goes up and down infinitely many times.[/quote]
A periodic function implies there is some predictability.
It is getting closer to vertical. I don’t think it will continue to rise infinitely as x approaches an arbitrary asymptote, therefore it will round off for a slow fall or crash.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
[quote]thefederalist wrote:
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
a periodic function?
That is a bold statement and I am sure the Noble panel would love to read your dissertation.[/quote]
how is that a bold statement? I’m saying that the price of gold goes up and down infinitely many times.[/quote]
A periodic function implies there is some predictability.[/quote]
while predictability isn’t inherent in the relation/function because it is a representation of many unquantifiable elements, the predictability i see comes, again, with booms busts and recoveries.
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
It is getting closer to vertical. I don’t think it will continue to rise infinitely as x approaches an arbitrary asymptote, therefore it will round off for a slow fall or crash.
[/quote]
Either that, or the currency implodes like the Zimbabwe Dollar (Zim).
I think a deflationary collapse would be preferable because the money we have would still be somewhat in place. We’ll just have to resume international settlements in Gold and phase out Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and corporate welfarism. That and NEVER let a lawyer be president ever again…