Predicting the Future is a Reality - Using Mathematics and the Moon

[jimbob]

Is that a real Einstein quote?

I don't know, but he was unhappy about the randomness implied by quantum mechanics:

"God does not play dice with the universe."

It actually seems as if the universe does at least play dice with itself though.

There are experiments that seem to show that even individual photons don't "know" both their momentum and position beyond the uncertainty principle...

an example quoting your Einstein and raising you a Hawking (shoulders of giants etc) is here from a quick google:

http://www.hawking.org.uk/lectures/dice.html

(or do I mean "Einstien" and "Hawkins" to score on the crackpot index?)

Jim

 

[Dave1001]

I would agree with you if Enron's collapse had only affected the stockholders of Enron. Instead, it had widespread impact on the US and world economy. Something like $100 billion disappeared overnight. It caused the entire accounting house of Arthur Anderson to disolve (and led to the discovery of accounting fraud at WorldCom). Thousands of employees lost their pension and deferred compensation. And it led to the passage of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, the most significant change in securities law since the 1930s. More after-effects are listed here.

As the Enron scandal moved the entire market, even the most diversified portfolio felt the effects. If the moon couldn't predict this, it is worthless. If it could, I'd like to see the proof.

Your "facts" don't support your conclusion, in my opinion. If one could predict large market trends (by some proprietary mechanism not widely known or utilized by other market participants) without being able to specifically predict the meltdowns of individual companies (even companies that are Fortune 5 and dominate subsections of the overall market), it wouldn't be worthless. It would be extremely valuable.

I think my statement remains true: "That's not a fair critcism unless they made that specific claim. I didn't notice an argument against diversification. In theory if one could predict large market trends by some propriety mechanism, one could still be unable to predict an individual company's success or failure."

 

[Loss Leader]

Your "facts" don't support your conclusion, in my opinion. If one could predict large market trends (by some proprietary mechanism not widely known or utilized by other market participants) without being able to specifically predict the meltdowns of individual companies (even companies that are Fortune 5 and dominate subsections of the overall market), it wouldn't be worthless. It would be extremely valuable.

I think my statement remains true: "That's not a fair critcism unless they made that specific claim. I didn't notice an argument against diversification. In theory if one could predict large market trends by some propriety mechanism, one could still be unable to predict an individual company's success or failure."

Enron affected the entire market. Did this stupid moonbat system predict the sudden downturn in the market or not, that's what I want to know. I'm not asking if it could predict that Enron was the cause. However, since Enron was the cause, I don't understand how a predicton about the sudden downturn in the market could possibly have been made without knowing that some huge multinational was about to implode and cause massive resturcturing across the entire corporate spectrum.

 

[CapelDodger]

I think "if it existed we would have already discovered it" is a terrible approach to empiricism and the scientific method.

That depends entirely on what reasons we have for thinking that it would have been discovered - or would even be obvious.

He put out an interesting hypothesis. The first place to start is to check the literature to see if it in fact has been investigated. The second place is to actually investigate.

The place to start is the implications of the hypothesis. Personality is an important factor in human reproductive success, so any seasonal dependence would constitute a selection pressure that would ultimately lead to a rutting-season. Which manifestly hasn't happened. Humans are more or less permanently in rut ("up for it", in the vernacular). Ergo, duff hypothesis. Without even getting into the selection pressure on the hormonal system.

 

[JanisChambers]

The moon effecting stocks... even if this may be true, lets try not to confuse psychology with geology.

 

[screensnot]

Sure, the moon affects stocks.

The day the moon falls out of orbit, and heads straight for earth, stock prices will fall as well.

There is a direct correlation there, IMO.

 

[Loss Leader]

Sure, the moon affects stocks.

The day the moon falls out of orbit, and heads straight for earth, stock prices will fall as well.

There is a direct correlation there, IMO.

I'd like to meet the person who, upon learning the moon is about to crash into the earth, gets on the phone with his broker and goes, "Sell! Sell!"

 

[screensnot]

Well, if you can covert your stocks to gold, there is a good chance your retirement fund will survive the impact.

 

[CapelDodger]

There's an old City saying, "Sell in May and go away". Summer's coming, time to wind up your positions and park the gelt where it's least likely to trouble you. Then get out of town and enjoy yourself. Come back in September and start all over again. Which helps to explain why crises have tended to break in October.

 

[Dave1001]

The place to start is the implications of the hypothesis. Personality is an important factor in human reproductive success, so any seasonal dependence would constitute a selection pressure that would ultimately lead to a rutting-season. Which manifestly hasn't happened. Humans are more or less permanently in rut ("up for it", in the vernacular). Ergo, duff hypothesis. Without even getting into the selection pressure on the hormonal system.

Good to your read your take, but I'm not as convinced that you've thoroughly ruled out his hypothesis as you are yourself.


Steven Lupo Grossi's hypothesis: "I'm not aware of any empirical support for personality differences based on birthday. If however, it does turn out that there are objective personality traits based on "astrological sign", I thought of a mechanism by which this might occur: Photoperiod.

Length of day varys by season, of course, and perhaps this influences hormone production during pregnancy, similar to Seasonal Affective Disorder (SAD). A baby concieved in April, born in December would experience a different pattern of homonal changes in utero than one concieved in September and born in June.

If this has any validity, we would expect to see opposite patterns south of the equator, and more noticeable patterns further from the equator.

Just an idea."

 

[Loss Leader]

If this has any validity, we would expect to see opposite patterns south of the equator, and more noticeable patterns further from the equator.

Sounds like a pretty easy hypothesis to test, at least initially. All you need are some of those seasonal affective lights, a phlebotamist and three dozen, say, Michigan Wolverines. You wait until December and stick half the college girls in a room with regular lighting from 6:00 pm to 8:00 pm every day for a month and put the other half under the lights for the same two hours. Draw blood once every 3 days and write your paper.

Phase two would involve actual pregnant women.

Phase three requires a young priest and an old priest.

 

[CapelDodger]

Good to your read your take, but I'm not as convinced that you've thoroughly ruled out his hypothesis as you are yourself.

Yeah, I hear that a lot. I've learned to live with it .

Steven Lupo Grossi's hypothesis: "I'm not aware of any empirical support for personality differences based on birthday. If however, it does turn out that there are objective personality traits based on "astrological sign", I thought of a mechanism by which this might occur: Photoperiod.

[snip]

If this has any validity, we would expect to see opposite patterns south of the equator, and more noticeable patterns further from the equator."

The last point is a good one, as it would - if detected - contradict the astrological fixation on the heavens.

General interest in the heavens seems to increase with latitude, as does seasonal variation and associated interest in the weather. An obvious hypothesis is that there's a connection .

 

[Dave1001]

General interest in the heavens seems to increase with latitude, as does ... associated interest in the weather.

Does it? Or did you make that up on the spot? I wouldn't be suprised if people that often make up evidence on the spot are also quick to dismiss the hypotheses of others without any interest in further research or empirical inquiry.

 

[Dave1001]

Sounds like a pretty easy hypothesis to test, at least initially. All you need are some of those seasonal affective lights, a phlebotamist and three dozen, say, Michigan Wolverines. You wait until December and stick half the college girls in a room with regular lighting from 6:00 pm to 8:00 pm every day for a month and put the other half under the lights for the same two hours. Draw blood once every 3 days and write your paper.

Phase two would involve actual pregnant women.

Phase three requires a young priest and an old priest.

You're misattributing what you quoted to me in your post #91. It was written by Steven Lupo Grossi.

 

[CapelDodger]

Phase three requires a young priest and an old priest.

Do you find that your phase threes always require a young priest and an old priest? In this case general subject of impregnation sprang to mind (I find it often does that) but nothing to do with priests. Call me old-fashioned if you like ...

 

[CapelDodger]

Does it? Or did you make that up on the spot? I wouldn't be suprised if people that often make up evidence on the spot are also quick to dismiss the hypotheses of others without any interest in further research or empirical inquiry.

Are you accusing me of something? If so, please be more specific.

 

[Loss Leader]

You're misattributing what you quoted to me in your post #91. It was written by Steven Lupo Grossi.

You're right. Sorry.

 

[Loss Leader]

Do you find that your phase threes always require a young priest and an old priest?

I hadn't noticed before but, now that you mention it, I do.

 

[Lothian]

I have certainly noticed a general Lunar trend. When the Moon is high in the sky stocks on the London Exchanges tend to keep their value. However once the moon passes to be replaced by the sun stocks start rising and falling.

For some strange reason the foreign exchanges have a similar pattern but it appears time lagged; a reason I am still working on.

 

[JonnyFive]

Not if you understand that greed matters. There's a horizon you can stay below where you can bleed a system without it reacting.

Milken was right about junk-bonds in his early days, the risk-premium outweighed the actual risk. Spread your investment and you will out-perform the staid institutions. This can be sustained as long as you don't attract attention. "Low-Key" is the watchword. Do not disturb the environment you're exploiting.

Milken et al did not appreciate that. And they were greedy.

Well, that was part of my point. I agree that this is possible, but I would hesitate to call it "beating the market." The concept of greed, as well as other elements of human behavior, can't possibly be eliminated from the market. However, understanding those things and using them to analyze the market isn't really the same as having a sure-fire system to always win.

I should have been clearer about what I meant by "beating." I don't mean "beating" as in "generally out-performing by making smart investments over a long enough time frame," I meant the kind of magic, always-win systems that some of these guys are pushing.

I have no qualms with the idea of being able to out-perform the market enough to make a reasonable return through understandign market factors, gathering good intelligence on business happenings, and understanding economic cycles.

I just don't think the moon magic has a damn thing to do with it, or think there's a set formula to predicting market cycles.

Well, if you can covert your stocks to gold, there is a good chance your retirement fund will survive the impact.

You, unfortunately, would not survive to enjoy. Unless, perhaps, you could convert yourself into gold. Now there's a thought.