>OK, my friend, grab your aspirin:
TLC,
You are an absolute Master at inducing headaches. The Bayer aspirin company could certainly use you to help propel aspirin sales. <g>
You asked me to work with you for a minute or two. Ok, I will. Here goes...
You said,
>no movement equals no time
I disagree. An X or an O on a PnF chart can sit there indefinitely with no movement, yet time [as measured by a clock] passes anyway.
You also said,
>Time does exist on a P&F chart, if we agree on my definition above. If there is movement, then by definition, there must be time.
Ok, but does it matter? I say no. The "inferred" time you mentioned, from one X to the next X, or from one O to the next O on a PnF chart, simply has no meaning terms of interpreting PnF charts. If it means something to you, on your planet, and you are able to translate that concept of time into money, then great. But I'm far from convinced that what ever time that might be on a PnF chart, inferred time or otherwise, helps you make money.
Now let me ask you to work with me for a minute or two so that I can once again try to explain to you why time has no meaning in terms of PnF charting...
Think of a PnF chart as a type of vector. A vector is something having magnitude and direction. PnF charts could be considered a type of vector because PnF charts quantify movement, not in terms of time as you suggested, but in that magnitude is represented by the number of X's or O's in a row, and direction is represented by placement, either up or down, of the X's and O's.
Maybe you would agree with this analogy: An airplane is on a heading of 260 degrees 45 miles from the airport. From a PnF chart, that's all the information you would know. You wouldn't know anything about the speed of the airplane. Why? Because time is not a component of the PnF chart. Therefore, without plotting time, you would not know whether the airplane was traveling at 60 mph or 660 mph. But so what? If all you want to know is the location of the airplane, the speed is irrelevant. Same with PnF charts. My understanding of PnF charts is all you need to know is "location"...location being the chart pattern itself.
Time, if time is there at all in a PnF chart - you argue that time must exist on a PnF chart if two X's or two O's are present - is simply irrelevant, IMO.
Now consider another analogy if you will. Think of a game of chess. What is important to the outcome of the game is the positioning of the chess pieces on the board, not the lapsed time inbetween movement of one piece from one position to another. Same with PnF charting. It is the positioning of the "chess pieces" [X's and O's] that are of importance, not the lapsed time between positioning of the X's and O's.
It is my opinion that the inherent beauty of PnF is that PnF does NOT use time. It seems to me that to inject a time component into PnF chart interpretations only serves to confuse rather than clarify.
I hope this helps with your concept of time and movement vis 'a vis PnF theory and practice.
Regards,
Ice |
