hmmm from the last threads i c some traders bullish atm...hmm i personally see the next few weeks a correction in the market..with up and coming reports coming in...but in august i say the bulls will come out again,lets wait and see
A lot of T/A is based around the psychology of the market participants and the similarities between these patterns (so far) shows that the 'panic' of a bubble bursting after the 'euphoria' of an over inflated bubble would appear to be much the same today as it was back then. While it remains to be seen whether this 'recovery' continues to play out as it did back in 1987, it is worth taking note of because it could provide opportunities for us traders/investors.
so no one entered anything short today i take it ?
i cant im fishing ........... and will be for a few more days yet
just intrested to know how the minions are thinking
confusion occurred here when your blue line with that time frame was plotted miles out. But now get your drift.....
well well.....lol, sorry the blue lines aren't to scale as I had limited space on the chart to draw them.
But they're still predicting an end to this faster than exponential growth in the Shanghai Composite Index between July 17 and 27. That change in growth will of course happen one day, but you'd have to have very good reasons to say that it will occur between those two dates. Those reasons are missing from this paper.
Looking for the final leg up after the China GDP figures
i think one cannot exclude the possibility of 2500 ?
In order for the market to drop that level there would have to be something alot more serious than whats already unfolded. What would the condition of the average super fund or alot of other assets be in if that were the case? You would be talking of a depression not a recession. I'm not a chartist or an economist but i think your 2500 is way off the money.
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
Econophysicist Predicts Date of Chinese Stock Market Collapse
The Shanghai Composite Index will burst between July 17 and 27, according to a new econophysics forecast.
The boom and bust nature of economics is one of the most puzzling aspects of the modern world. In the last year or so, many people have learned to their cost that when bubbles burst, businesses, jobs, and livelihoods can go with them.
So an obvious question arises: can we spot bubbles when they occur and predict when they are about to burst? One group of theorists say that they can and have used their techniques to make an extraordinary prediction.
First, they say that they've found the telltale signs of a bubble in the growth rate of the Shanghai Composite stock-market index. And second, they say that this bubble will burst between July 17 and 27.
That's a brave move, so let's look at it in more detail. The theorist behind this prediction is Didier Sornette at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, in Zurich, who has pioneered the study of market bubbles. Last year, he used his method for spotting bubbles to reveal that oil prices where dangerously inflated.
The telltale sign of a bubble, he says, is a faster than exponential growth rate caused by a positive feedback mechanism that generates this nonlinear growth.
The faster than exponential growth rate is relatively easy to spot. According to the analysis done by Sornette and a few mates, the Shanghai Composite Index certainly seems to have had a faster than exponential growth--a 69 percent rise since October of last year.
Whether an unsustainable positive feedback mechanism is causing this growth isn't so clear. Sornette and co suggest that what is responsible is the Chinese government's massive lending spree designed to maintain its economic growth rate at 8 percent a year. China has maintained that kind of growth for some years now.
Let's take at face value the idea that a bubble has formed. What of the prediction that it is about to burst? Just how this team arrives at such a precise date isn't clear, but whatever the mechanism, this is a much more speculative move.
One thing that physicists have learned about complex systems, such as stock markets, earthquakes, and forest fires, to name just a few, is that when changes occur they are scale invariant.
That means that if you were to remove the numbers from the axes of a graph plotting this behavior, there is no way that you could identify the scale of the events by looking at the plot. This implies that there is really no difference in principle between a small change in the stock market today and catastrophic change tomorrow.
That makes predictions of almost anything, let alone the imminent collapse of a bubble, extremely hard to make. Impossible may not be too strong a word for it.
Sornette and co do not say how they make their prediction, but they do hedge it by saying, "This will lead to a change in regime which may be a crash or a more gentle bubble deflation."
But they're still predicting an end to this faster than exponential growth in the Shanghai Composite Index between July 17 and 27. That change in growth will of course happen one day, but you'd have to have very good reasons to say that it will occur between those two dates. Those reasons are missing from this paper.
I say that this is a prediction that is impossible to make. And I'm prepared to bet Sornette that he's wrong. The stakes? Let's say an arXiv blog baseball cap and T-shirt.
Ref: arxiv.org/abs/0907.1827: The Chinese Equity Bubble: Ready to Burst
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=317394&postcount=9
London Bridge Is Swaying ‘Round
On June 10, 2000, the Millennium Bridge opened to the public with great fanfare.
London’s first bridge across the Thames in over a century, it had a sleek design””the architect wanted it to look
like a “blade of light.” 9 However, when thousands of people stepped on the bridge that day, it
started to sway from side to side so much that people had to stop or hold on to the rails.
Fearing
for the public’s safety, officials closed the bridge two days later and, following a retrofitting, it
reopened in February 2002.
What led to this high-profile failure? People exert a small amount of lateral excitation when they
walk. Normally, these excitations cancel out when a group crosses a bridge. However, the
Millennium Bridge initially had insufficient lateral dampeners, which allowed a little swaying when
a sufficient number of people were on the bridge.
That swaying forced people to change their gait
by widening their steps, leading to greater lateral excitation and more swaying. The wobbling and
crowd synchrony emerged simultaneously.
The crucial insight is the existence of a critical point. Simulations show that roughly 165 people
can walk on the bridge with little impact on the wobble amplitude.
But adding just a
few more pedestrians causes the amplitude to change dramatically, especially as the feedback
between gait adjustment and wobble amplitude kicks in . For the
first 165 bridge crossers, there’s little wobble and no sense of any potential hazard even though
the bridge is on the cusp of a state change.
London Bridge Is Swaying ‘Round
On June 10, 2000, the Millennium Bridge opened to the public with great fanfare.
London’s first bridge across the Thames in over a century, it had a sleek design””the architect wanted it to look
like a “blade of light.” 9 However, when thousands of people stepped on the bridge that day, it
started to sway from side to side so much that people had to stop or hold on to the rails.
Fearing
for the public’s safety, officials closed the bridge two days later and, following a retrofitting, it
reopened in February 2002.
What led to this high-profile failure? People exert a small amount of lateral excitation when they
walk. Normally, these excitations cancel out when a group crosses a bridge. However, the
Millennium Bridge initially had insufficient lateral dampeners, which allowed a little swaying when
a sufficient number of people were on the bridge.
That swaying forced people to change their gait
by widening their steps, leading to greater lateral excitation and more swaying. The wobbling and
crowd synchrony emerged simultaneously.
The crucial insight is the existence of a critical point. Simulations show that roughly 165 people
can walk on the bridge with little impact on the wobble amplitude.
But adding just a
few more pedestrians causes the amplitude to change dramatically, especially as the feedback
between gait adjustment and wobble amplitude kicks in . For the
first 165 bridge crossers, there’s little wobble and no sense of any potential hazard even though
the bridge is on the cusp of a state change.
so i take it im the only goose in these forums that entered anything short today ?
geez next time im gunna throw the bishop overboard instead of listening to his drunken fool ramblings
You're not the only goose nun! Lets see what tomorrow will bring
would that be classed as a "gaggle " then ?
Does closing out profitable longs today make me a goose as well??
brty
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?