SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Dell Technologies Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Lee who wrote (83314)12/2/1998 2:30:00 PM
From: Chuzzlewit  Respond to of 176387
 
Hi Lee, you noted:

... so when we discuss the attributes of TA, shouldn't we set clear conditions or assumptions?

Of course! And that's the point. You need a way to test the hypothesis and the hypothesis is testable only if it can be shown to be wrong. The problem is that the TA folks have an explanation for everything, therefore you cannot come up with a set of circumstances that could demonstrate the fallibility of the hypothesis. Since theses people have promulgated the hypothesis I would ask them what set of circumstances would indicate that it is wrong. I have yet to come up with an answer. That's why I pointed to the possible outcomes of the "support" hypothesis.

You are correct in positing the reasonableness of multiple causes for market behavior. Multiple regression models are designed to test those kinds of hypotheses.

TTFN,
CTC



To: Lee who wrote (83314)12/2/1998 2:32:00 PM
From: BGR  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 176387
 
Lee,

Substantial research has been done which show that percentage increase in equity prices follow a "random" (same as Brownian motion) path. That by definition invalidates any TA approach. I can provide references if requested.

-Apratim.