We have a little surprize inzide for youss.
Just slam your head in there... it'll come up over the side.
Love watching that Turd go up and down, up and down.
That - http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/01/26/stephen-hawking-contradicts-earlier-black-hole-claims
This - https://blogs.lotterypost.com/jadelottery/2013/6/the-blackhole-and-two-dark-moments.htm
When we say we're gonna freeze your asz off, we mean it.
https://blogs.lotterypost.com/jadelottery/2013/10/below-zero-temps.htm
Oh, by the way, how's that hurricane season doing?
We told you it would be nearly non-existent back on 2013-04-17.
https://blogs.lotterypost.com/jadelottery/2013/4/reminder-the-holiday-of-thunder-this-year-is.htm
Also, related to the above post: https://blogs.lotterypost.com/jadelottery/2013/5/we-got-hit.htm
Funny fing is, we didn't use any data to analyze to make a prediction... no, no, no.
We made it happen.
Jehocifer.
Floatie-floatie-do-do.
Floatie Turdie you're the one.
You make the Market so much fun.
We'll get you back in it, one way or another.
Relativistic Market Speed
The relativistic market speed is based on an analysis of the relativistic market change. It is a scaled value that fits a wave summation from a wave matrix bidirectional mean averaging system into a range of 0 to 120; where a speed of 60 is the average cruising speed. For this demonstration we will be examining the Dow Jones Industrial Average across the span of time from 1896 May 26 to the most recent date of 2014 Jan 24 as the complete speed analysis, however, we will focus in on this century for charting data.
The analysis begins by using the relativistic market change on each day’s close compared to the previous day’s close. Table 1 shows the first and last week of our time span with the close values and relativistic market change; negative relativistic change is a loss, positive is a gain.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Table 1 |
We can plot this century’s data, 2000-01-03 to 2014-01-24, and see the variation in the relativistic change for different market events. Figure 1 shows the Dow daily close values and relativistic market change for each day. The relativistic change shows the immediate response and magnitude of change in the market value for the different events, like the 2008 market crash. If we want to see the trends in relativistic change, we need to analyze the relativistic change using an iterative process of what is known as Bidirectional Mean Averaging to get a Wave Matrix that is used to create the relativistic market speed. The bidirectional mean averaging smoothes the data in a wave matrix format. Waves in the wave matrix are summed together and scaled to fit a range from 0 to 120; giving a general trend in the data that might not be easily seen in the immediate relativistic change. Information the Bidirectional Mean Averaging, The Wave Matrix and downloadable tools for Excel can be found here at the Lottery Post. We’ll post some links at the end of this blog.
|
Fig. 1 |
When the bidirectional mean averaging is applied and waves 1 through 8 in the wave matrix are summed, we can see in figure 2 the subtle trend changes in the relativistic change.
|
Fig. 2 |
This view is still a little hard to see the variation well enough, so, we’ll remove the relativistic change values and change the scale of the relativistic change to a relativistic speed reading that goes from 0 to 120. A speed reading of 60 is equivalent to a reading of 0 on the relativistic change scale. Figure 3 shows the new scale and now we can clearly see the subtle changes in market value as a relativistic speed reading. The relativistic market speed is calibrated to the time span of 1896-05-26 to 2014-01-24 and the entire chart has been previously posted in an earlier blog. What we have found is, a speed reading of 40 to 60 indicate a market correction, 20 to 40 indicate a market crash, and 0 to 20 indicate a market catastrophe.
|
Fig. 3 |
Bidirectional Mean Averaging links
Bidirectional Mean Averaging and The Wave Matrix
The Wave Matrix - Excel 2007 Addin
Excel Addin links
ZIP File - http://www.jadexcode.com/downloads/jadexcodexcel2007addin/JADEXCODExcel2007AddInSetupFiles.zip
Self Extracting ZIP - http://www.jadexcode.com/downloads/jadexcodexcel2007addin/JADEXCODExcel2007AddInSetupFiles.exe
ZIP File - ftp://www.jadexcode.com/excel/addins/JADEXCODExcel2007AddInSetupFiles.zip
Self Extracting ZIP - ftp://www.jadexcode.com/excel/addins/JADEXCODExcel2007AddInSetupFiles.exe
Relativistic Change in the Market
The relativistic change in the market is derived from the classical method of measuring change in value.
The classic formula for measuring change is as follows; where A is some original earlier value and B is some current value.
We remove the percentage to get the proportional expression.
Now distribute the ‘A’ denominator between the two numerator variables and write as a difference between to fractions.
This can be reduced a bit by changing to 1, making the expression as follows.
The part can be set equal to a variable, , to represent a value that is the proportion of to .
The expression then becomes the following.
The expression tells us the difference in proportion of the current value to the original value and a fixed point of the proportion of the original value to the original value. Going forward we need to examine the value and see how this changes by itself. Since it’s a direct proportion of our current value to our original value, anything greater than 1 is a gain and anything less than 1 is a loss. We can graph by setting it equal to and see how this looks by plotting the equation, .
Fig. 1 |
As we can see in figure 1 above, it’s basically a slanted straight line. Regardless what values and are, as long as they are non-zero values, they will follow this line. To get the classical percent change, we can just subtract 1 and multiply by 100%.
In figure 2, we can see that different points on the line tell if there is a gain, no change, or a loss in market value. Point i indicates a loss, point j shows no change and point k means a gain in value.
Fig. 2 |
In the past this worked well, however, there is a problem with this measurement. As we can see, the gain is any value greater than 1; all the way out to infinity. Yet, the loss is just the tiny range from less than 1 to 0. It seems to us there is a vastly different perception between gain and loss using these dissimilar ranges. On the gain side of the equation, there really is no need to be concerned other than, hey, protect your investment. On the loss side of the equation, there’s a problem. How do you gauge the loss that becomes a sense of urgency? Looking at the current plot in figure 2, there’s very little room for making an error in judgment when it comes to losing your investment. Point i seems to be at about 0.75 or 75% of the original value; that’s a 25% loss, seems urgent. What if it’s just a 10% loss? Does the level of urgency at 10% loss seem less than a 25% loss, maybe?
Using the old method of market change doesn’t really work well in sensing that level of urgency in loss. We need to rework the method so we can clearly see the level urgency in change on the loss side of the equation. For this, we need to go back and use some mathematical sleight of hand to rework this 20th Century static methodology into a 21st Century relativistic methodology. There’s a point in our reforming the expression to the expression that we need to examine a little bit and make a change before we continue with deriving the new expression.
Below is the point where we separated the expression into the difference of two fractions.
In the expression, the right side fraction is a static point that relates only to itself, . It’s the moment of initial investment and is a past point relative to itself. This is where the problem of measurement can give a false sense of change. To overcome this, we need to change the static faction to a dynamic one. If we have the forward looking fraction, , then we need to alter the static fraction, , to be a backward looking fraction. We do this by changing to ; this now gives a proper relationship in both directions of time. The new equation then becomes the following.
If we apply the proportion to the expression, we find that,
and taking the reciprocal of both sides it becomes,
plugging in to the new expression it becomes:
We can reform this into a fraction as follows.
We can plot this new expression by setting it equal to y and compare to the classic p value.
In figure 3 we can see how values for p less than 1 show a dramatic change in y the closer to 0 the p value gets. In the plot we can also see p values greater than 1 are positive, indicating a gain, and p values less than 1 are negative, indicating a loss. However, in this plot, it becomes much more apparent of the urgency in loss by the large drop in the curve. It also shows the classic p line and the y-axis are actually asymptotes of the curve. Looking at the plot and using the new expression we can see a 0.90 value in p is just a -0.10 loss in the classical method, but in the relativistic method it becomes -0.21; a much more urgent value.
Fig. 3 |
We can setup a table showing side by side the differences between the two methods. In table 1, we can see the classic method shows no level of urgency as it moves into negative values, however, the relativistic values show urgency almost immediately.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Table 1 |
The reason this new relativistic market change works so well is because of the two difference fractions in the new equation, and . The two different fractions have difference meanings, but are dynamically tided to each other. The fraction means in terms of a loss, “What have we lost?”, and the fraction means, “What will we lose?” These are balanced magnitudes of change that become dynamically tided to each other through a subtractive comparison.
This leads into another subject of market change we like to call the Relativistic Market Speed. It’s a means of measuring market climb and market fall that strips out the economy of scale in an exponential growth system. We apply the relativistic market change to any market value by using the previous close, A, and the current close, B. We’ll post this a little later so you can have time to absorb this a bit.
...if you looook juuussst the right way, you will see two concentric rings form.
take very careful observations and/or measurements, they show something we've mentioned here before.
I think we're going to have to get liquored up to explain it and the mathematics behind it.
This stuff is 21st Century, not the old 20th Century percentage way of measuring change.
We'll put out an up dated chart later tonight after we get home from work.
We'll work on a presentation for later this weekend.
This is really beginning to look Ugly, maybe even Scary.
If you've seen our last post on the Relativistic Market Speedometer and coupled with the our recent post on Employment numbers, Uh-uff.
There's no cold deep enough that can send shivers up me spine like this weeks market losses.
Dunno, you might want to grab a flashlight before you go down that Market Black Hole... ...it's dark down there.
Click the Image, it's Expandable once inside.
Conservatives Leave New York.
no different than..
Whites Only.
or
Irish Need Not Apply.
it's plain and simple...
Nothing can justify a Bigot.
or what we like to call a Public Troll.
Been playing around with Even/Odd and Low/High numbers in Pick 3 lately.
I decided to apply the Karnaugh Map to the Pick 3 using the Even/Odd and Low/High values as bits in the setting up the map.
Below are some different ways of showing the map in my State's Pick 3 (MN) numbers in the heat map.
This first one has the color and hit count in each position.
On the left is the Even/Odd and at the top is the Low/High for each A, B, and C position in the Pick 3 combos; like so: A B C.
It also shows the Even/Odd and Low/High bits transformed into its decimal equivalent, n.
Below the hit fonts are semi-camouflaged for the average hits.
Next it shows all the hit fonts camouflaged.
It's currently something we've been doing in Excel as a test.
We'll keep working this for now and might have something to post later.
WRONG!!! This time around.
Surely all those Unemployed and Nonemployed are making the markets go up.
Maybe it's because those that are Employed have fantastic incomes and have nothing better to do with their money but to invest.
There's something askew here and those of you clever enough to figure it out should know.
Something dastardly is coming likes of which we have never seen before.
are working a little too good me thinks.
All quiet up there, too quiet.
Air -25 F°
Ground -60 F° or more with a non-contact infrared thermometer; it went -OL.
updated, just checked before going into shower.
We love the cold.
It's such a beautiful thing.
All sparkly snow and ice.
We want more.
Don't need Phony Fiat Cash to do it.
Don't need to be the Disease of Wall Street either.
Just be an unknown, little nobody in some nowhere town U.S.A.
It's fan-fut-king-tastic.
And Boy do we have some Surprizesuses instore for You-sss.
Jehocifer.
Oh-pff, one mooment... have to get the shaker table ready.
Jehocifer.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_AA
Maybe better as a No Foolin', April Fool's.
You know, the other New Year's Day.
Giga-Giga-Do, We See You.
Eh-eh-eh-eh-ah-ah-HA-HA!
SSSS-Let's SSSS-find SSSS-out.
Jehocifer.
cold enough for ya?
ah.brrr.r.r.rr.r.r.rr.r.r
we are here.
Jehocifer.
Work the Solution again.
Maybe there's something in encrypting the outcome before the outcome.
Dunno, if the anii weren't so hard at work, we wouldn't have to hack the matrix like we do.
Code Cracking Chaos opening some Whoopass on Old Orwellian Order.
Jehocifer.
March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 August 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 January 2006 November 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004