Re: Something, something, something, technical analysis

To Tzupy, MaxwellsDemon, zimmah -thanks for the appreciation. I wish I was good it TA, but I've just started learning it.
To cbeast - special thanks. The sign of real popularity is people parodying you Grin

You made an analogy that TA is like math and physics. Math and physics make 100% accurate predictions. You imply that TA makes 100% accurate predictions. Please demonstrate your predictive science.

No such implications was made. The table is only about ways of processing raw data. The way we calculate MACD from price and histogram from MACD is similar to way we calculate speed from coordinates and acceleration from speed. The part of physics that deals with it is called kinematics and, being pure descriptional one, makes no predictions. To make a prediction we have to introduce idea of force. (Which would convert kinematics to dynamics. Dynamics does make predictions. To make TA a predictional science we have to introduce idea of "market forces". Which I didn't do, because it would be an analogy rather than science.

Hehehe. Nice.

One remark though: I like your table, but your original equivalence was: divergence - second derivative - acceleration. You sure about that one? I'm still trying myself to wrap my head around how to best conceptualize 'divergence' (in the TA sense), but I'm not sure if it's as straightforward as it being the second derivative.

In the paragraph above you seem to substitute 'histogram' for 'divergence', which I think is more accurate. 'Divergence' is, imo, at least another step removed from that.

I had hope nobody would notice

Yes, I do think 'histogram' is more correct. I'll make correction in my original post, but the evidence of my stupidity would still remain in numerous quotes. Facepalm! Grin