tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-62569407406104224972017-04-28T07:41:53.525-07:00Market Time and Price TownhallJimhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14728986969466359235noreply@blogger.comBlogger427125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6256940740610422497.post-911384651005630602017-04-06T04:54:00.001-07:002017-04-06T08:32:41.400-07:00Current Market: The first and second squares of 12 and mated cubesThis essay is a bit of a rehash of the immediately preceding essay but with a little more perspective on the second, third and fourth dimensions' possible interrelation. Takes me a while to deal with the 'aha's' with which I am presented and, even then, I'm hardly at peace with my supposed understanding.<br /><br />The second dimension square has four sides any way you look at it. The third dimension cube is comprised of 6 square faces having 12 independent, unique edges. You dissemble the cube into 6 second dimension squares each having 4 edges then you have 6X4=24 edges.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-GmSzHnnX2Zw/WMGApeHH2wI/AAAAAAAAG1Y/ql_Zhm_FebUFCVx1nvBfCVbu90_IzHzewCPcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-09%2Bat%2B11.17.40%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="183" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-GmSzHnnX2Zw/WMGApeHH2wI/AAAAAAAAG1Y/ql_Zhm_FebUFCVx1nvBfCVbu90_IzHzewCPcB/s400/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-09%2Bat%2B11.17.40%2BAM.png" width="400" /></a></div>Given a 1X1X1 cube, the perimeter of the cube (12 sides) will be 12 and the perimeter of the 6 dissembled squares will be 24. A law of two and three dimensional Platonic cubic structure. <br /><br />12 unique edges of the assembled 1X1X1 cube divided into 24 less so independent edges of the dissembled cube gives us the metric of 2. And, as previously discussed, the growth spiral of the square of Pythagoras' hypotenuse of the 1X1 square is 1, 1.4142, 2, 2.8284..... 2 is a very very important geometric metric. And Phi, well, as expert market analysts we all know the Phi growth spiral (or as attorneys say "know or should have know").<br /><br />What does the third dimension cube look like in the fourth dimension? We would want to see the metric 2 involved, wouldn't we? "As above, so below?" Let's take the question to the laboratory and examine data that has been accumulated on our lab rat name DJIA. We need data. Here are the ugly mated (sharing a common face) cubes of the period 2000-present:<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-XOC87y3_b28/WOYOIUItkMI/AAAAAAAAHBs/iz2jDDb1O0cJHzbrw_xFfz4bzcFXOPungCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-04-06%2Bat%2B5.44.41%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="180" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-XOC87y3_b28/WOYOIUItkMI/AAAAAAAAHBs/iz2jDDb1O0cJHzbrw_xFfz4bzcFXOPungCLcB/s400/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-04-06%2Bat%2B5.44.41%2BAM.png" width="400" /></a></div><br />In previous essay, Price Time Vector (PTV) values have been computed and presented. <i>Both the approximate values in the chart above and the detailed mathematic values previously computed are based on the assumed points K and L. Points K and L were derived from the application of the "camera obscura" concept in a previous essay and from a yet to be described "coincidence."</i> The above software calculations are approximate as they require visual fitting to points. The exact data has been computed and can be found <i><a href="https://www.screencast.com/t/Pa5axARi" target="_blank">HERE</a></i>.<br /><br />Will we find 2 when we assemble and dissemble each of the 2 cubes above?<br /><br />Rearrange the previously computed PTVs to form the perimeters and average sides of each of the mated cubes, both for 12 unique sides of each cube and 24 sides of six squares of each cube:<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Pyjb_BhzdRQ/WOYkrGYkNAI/AAAAAAAAHCk/q3o21dnkNzgoKlK6h48U5ytq-vffSqOFACLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-04-06%2Bat%2B7.20.48%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="266" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Pyjb_BhzdRQ/WOYkrGYkNAI/AAAAAAAAHCk/q3o21dnkNzgoKlK6h48U5ytq-vffSqOFACLcB/s400/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-04-06%2Bat%2B7.20.48%2BAM.png" width="400" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Duh, it works. It had to work and I'm sure a mathematic notation and logic person could provide a proof in abstract logic. Me, I have to plod through numbers. Simply, 21319 / 10659 = 2 and 17595 / 8647 = 2. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Now that we have the numbers for such a seemingly inconsequential proof, let's see if there is something else. Let's check the relation of the perimeters:</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-lebTAMHu-2o/WOYjqEnX9rI/AAAAAAAAHCY/8KX4N-1vdB0vSNqCuJ4B-V-gom4IdLJ1gCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-04-06%2Bat%2B7.16.04%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="77" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-lebTAMHu-2o/WOYjqEnX9rI/AAAAAAAAHCY/8KX4N-1vdB0vSNqCuJ4B-V-gom4IdLJ1gCLcB/s320/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-04-06%2Bat%2B7.16.04%2BAM.png" width="320" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">.28%, a coincidence? What say ye, Randomites?</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: center;">***</div><div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">The '2' had to emerge from each cubes relation between of 12 unique sides of the cube to 24 redundant sides of the cube's component 6 squares. Had to happen; baring my computational errors. The laws of the second and third dimensions had to be respected in the fourth dimension.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">Comparing the mated cubes; was there any two dimensional or three dimensional rule that required the relation of the perimeters of the mated cubes to be the quotient of 2 and Phi? No, I don't think so. <i><b>Nature, at work in the DJIA, made it so. A "natural law" it would seem. Books have been written about how WD Gann used the phrase "natural law" as a code. If we knew more about the fourth dimension, would we have said "it had to happen?"</b></i></div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">Does this suggest the hint of a law of fourth dimension systems of mathematic growth? I think so. Is it the same relation for every fourth dimensional system (markets, people, natural events...) or could there be other relations including the growth spirals of 5 or 3, etc? Of the effect of personal vibration (promoted by both WD Gann and his nom de plume, Luo Clement) on one's destiny? As well, I believe so. Like the consistency of math throughout its progression between the second, third and fourth dimension, it is intuitive (to me at least) that natural law will be consistent as between all natural phenomena; markets, physical geologic, atmospheric events, sociologic events... all the way down to personal destiny. But that's conflating </div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">At a minimum, the experiment strongly suggests mathematic structure of spacetime. Not randomness. Exquisite mathematic structure; "geometric points of force." For every effect there is a cause. Everything is circular and responsive; for every action there is a reaction. Every point in the market is related to a previous point in the market. For every act in our lives, there is a response.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">This experiment also suggests some level of integrity of the proposed and here above assumed values of points K and L. I do not believe K and L are exact, but increasingly, they seem to pretty close given the derivative appearance of these metrics. It will be interesting to see how DJIA plays out later this month.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">Oh, there's so much more cooking in the DJIA laboratory.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">Jim Ross </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div>Jimhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14728986969466359235noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6256940740610422497.post-75911173952342029552017-04-02T06:25:00.000-07:002017-04-02T06:38:34.555-07:00Current Market: The twin cubes, 2 and Phi, this morning's "Aha"When looking at the Price Time Vector (PTV) values of the twin cubes of the 2000-present market I have been examining, many classic key numbers jump out...as I've mentioned. "Aha's" that pull me back into chasm of "Why?" Here's a simple 'aha.'<br /><br />We all know the Fibonacci growth spiral that gives us Phi and most serious market students accept that it is a fabric of markets. But what about 2? We know WD Gann taught his students the heuristic of doubling and halving of time or price. He ascribed the importance of the 45* angle to its dividing time and price into equal parts. At the basest of levels of biology, the cell divides into equal parts. Back maybe a 2000 years a riddle of the ancients' was how to propagate the 1X1 square forward to create a square of twice the area of the first.<br /><br />The ancients riddle of the growth spiral of 2. It is 1, 1.4142, 2, 2.8284, 4, 5.6568, 32.... Its the side of the square beginning with the 1X1 square having a side of one, followed by the grown square having a side length of the hypotenuse of the 1X1 (which is 1.4142, e.g. root 2), followed by the grown square having a side length of 2 (which is the hypotenuse of the 1.4142X1.4142 square e.g. sqrt(1.4141^2 + 1.4142^2).....<br /><br />Two growth spirals from two well known numbers; 2, and Phi. Already knowing what I want to find for you because I had the "aha" moment this morning, take the two spirals and concoct a number we want to find in the twin cubes.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Uc4bvv65vls/WODgvYUHmeI/AAAAAAAAG_4/zRU7mjjEunAXlwYMgZgnZNJPt8G-MinvACLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-04-02%2Bat%2B7.28.56%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Uc4bvv65vls/WODgvYUHmeI/AAAAAAAAG_4/zRU7mjjEunAXlwYMgZgnZNJPt8G-MinvACLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-04-02%2Bat%2B7.28.56%2BAM.png" /></a></div>Now we need some raw data of the twin cubes. Remember the latest iteration of the "ugly" twin cubes of the DJIA from 2000 to present twisting through spacetime:<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-9g2ifDOAOFI/WN-J7qbjcPI/AAAAAAAAG_s/Y0EHAzLvlwMyGJToN4qJv4RjdG1CnFvHQCPcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-04-01%2Bat%2B7.07.03%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="148" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-9g2ifDOAOFI/WN-J7qbjcPI/AAAAAAAAG_s/Y0EHAzLvlwMyGJToN4qJv4RjdG1CnFvHQCPcB/s320/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-04-01%2Bat%2B7.07.03%2BAM.png" width="320" /></a></div><br />The PTV values on the above are approximate because one must visually fit the end points to tops and bottoms. Here are the perfect calculations the software makes according to the application of Pythagoras' theorem of the hypotenuse of the 1X1 square to time and to space (the PTV):<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-LX8dux0EWXE/WODkH7xBDEI/AAAAAAAAHAE/S90ci3X9IIgKwJkhqh_pFpLMp5Ly6n9TACLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-04-02%2Bat%2B7.36.56%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-LX8dux0EWXE/WODkH7xBDEI/AAAAAAAAHAE/S90ci3X9IIgKwJkhqh_pFpLMp5Ly6n9TACLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-04-02%2Bat%2B7.36.56%2BAM.png" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-LX8dux0EWXE/WODkH7xBDEI/AAAAAAAAHAE/S90ci3X9IIgKwJkhqh_pFpLMp5Ly6n9TACLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-04-02%2Bat%2B7.36.56%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-LX8dux0EWXE/WODkH7xBDEI/AAAAAAAAHAE/S90ci3X9IIgKwJkhqh_pFpLMp5Ly6n9TACLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-04-02%2Bat%2B7.36.56%2BAM.png" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-jAQDjQLZ2Ro/WODtBEz4HvI/AAAAAAAAHAU/iWPyQfzixqAVQYgco8IyZTg5ChYUse9KwCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-04-02%2Bat%2B8.21.57%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="206" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-jAQDjQLZ2Ro/WODtBEz4HvI/AAAAAAAAHAU/iWPyQfzixqAVQYgco8IyZTg5ChYUse9KwCLcB/s320/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-04-02%2Bat%2B8.21.57%2BAM.png" width="320" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Now let's arrange certain of the vector values to comprise each of the two cubes. Hint, a cube has 12 <u><i><b>unique</b></i></u> edges or PTVs. [I underscore the word unique as a segue to a future 'aha' and essay.]</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-PLK2mce9vBk/WODv7yYeN_I/AAAAAAAAHAg/97Kvwghrt04fdPE8yqI5t5luqv7niVEfgCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-04-02%2Bat%2B8.30.42%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="115" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-PLK2mce9vBk/WODv7yYeN_I/AAAAAAAAHAg/97Kvwghrt04fdPE8yqI5t5luqv7niVEfgCLcB/s400/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-04-02%2Bat%2B8.30.42%2BAM.png" width="400" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Perhaps one cube of spacetime PTVs ruled by 2 and the successive one by Phi? And their conjoin representing a hint of the structure of spacetime?</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">.26% difference. Coincidence? Remember, its all extrapolated based on two assumed future points, K and L. If I change point K from April 20, 2017 to April 20, 2019, the percentage difference becomes 5.04%. Get the drift? If the calculations were based on finer data (time to the minute - or four minutes to satisfy Mr. Gann's claim it being the smallest cycle - as opposed to the hour), might we find a more perfected set of dates and prices that would make the percentage difference even smaller. Simulation, optimization. A process of getting closer and closer to a perfect solution but never getting there. Hmmm, like Pi.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">***</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Imagine you find yourself instantly comprised at an age of say, 5, without and previous history, in the middle of a vast corn maze. You haven't a past to remember so as to compare your predicament to past happy or sad events, you haven't any frame of reference. No sense of sadness or happiness. Just 7 foot high corn stalks all around you and turning paths between them. There's nutritious berries and vegetables (and, of course, corn) on every path. All the base needs of which you are aware are met. But, each day at the same time as the previous day, when you look up at the sun, you know you're about where you've been before. You haven't made progress to where ever it is you intended to go.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">You dream of what is beyond the maze as you wander its paths for years and decades of your life. At the corner of every turn where there are alternate paths, you notice signs with different color configurations that, over the years of seeing them and thinking about them, you decide they have some meaning in the scheme of the structure of the maze. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Then, one day, you get the idea that you'll follow one series of the several sets of signs at each junction. You'll concentrate on finding that same sign at the next junction and if is not there, then you'll back track to the previous junction and take the alternate path. On that alternate path you find the sign that you had decided to follow. You find the sign you for which are looking <i><b>as if they were put there</b></i> for you to find. By who?</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Ultimately, you reach a dead end. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">But its not a failure, you've eliminated a path. Now, with the time you have left in your life (however long that is), is there time to follow all the sequences of signs to get where you think you want to go?</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">And really, is it all so important that you get there? Or is the challenge more the end in itself? Thinking and knowing the small but not inconsequential part of the whole that you might represent if you simply go about doing what you feel you were intended to do.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Sadly, I doubt I'll ever see the structure of the maze as I believe Mr. Gann saw it. But, like the golfer whose terrible round is ended with a birdie that brings him back for another round, I have the "aha's."</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Jim Ross</div>Jimhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14728986969466359235noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6256940740610422497.post-6395851342047501352017-04-01T10:45:00.000-07:002017-04-01T13:51:36.732-07:00Current Market: The cube, DJIA and WD Gann's beansWhy would WD Gann, who I've read, had his own seat on the NYSE, spend so much time with beans? I'm sure there are many rationales that one might posit, but I have a new one...or I say 'new' but know its only new to me.<br /><br />Before I <i>spill my beans</i>, I'll <i>boil down</i> about a half dozen essays I've written on my laboratory experiments for the last week, but haven't published, to a couple generalized supposed insights I think I have. First, there will be a new high in DJIA and my present projection is April 20, 2017 at 22073. From there, DJIA should drop to just over 16000 in the December 2017 timeframe.<br /><br />Yes, I know I made that projection a couple weeks ago and then changed it to May 2, 2017 at above 22000. But I've made some mathematic discoveries since then that I find compelling. You know when the first time you discovered the market reacting to Phi...it was shazaam! Those mathematic wonderments have been happening to me nearly daily. I don't understand the structure of the math as yet and as always, but my wonderment at first seeing Phi presents itself is now excitement to an exponential degree. And it happens every day as I experiment with the math of these charts and every night as I try to make sense of it in half sleep.<br /><br />My latest elaboration of the cubes formed in DJIA are not the pretty little boxes that you might see in Bradley Cowan's "Four Dimensional Stock Market Cycles and Structures" "Charts" V B. Two nicely angularly envisioned cubes. I've drawn an early offering of the two adjacent "pretty" cubes of the current market that are similar to Mr. Cowan's depiction of the circa 1929 markets:<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-lHgd6ptTBoE/WMZt2I8STZI/AAAAAAAAG54/iWSB90rPn_ksJ2hTApswOtAFEGeWJ0czgCPcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-13%2Bat%2B5.58.02%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="146" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-lHgd6ptTBoE/WMZt2I8STZI/AAAAAAAAG54/iWSB90rPn_ksJ2hTApswOtAFEGeWJ0czgCPcB/s320/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-13%2Bat%2B5.58.02%2BAM.png" width="320" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">The cubes aren't that way. The math proves it. I suspect Mr. Cowan knows and left it to the reader to figure out 'the rest of the story.' But I don't know what he knows; maybe he does maybe he doesn't. And but again, the math says it is not as depicted above. Above is a nice suggestion but hardly the reality.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">The math says the true four-dimensional twin cubes depiction in two dimensions is ugly. Sometimes there might be only one not conjoined with another but I don't know that either. I do know there are two gosh awful ugly cubes from the DJIA 2000 to the present (nearing point K) and until the end of the entire structure in the fall of 2017 (point L):</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-xRzjqPfccQo/WN0XHtVezRI/AAAAAAAAG-w/nkV7-fUY2D0tWapaq-D6w6sXjR7XFBQdwCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-30%2Bat%2B10.32.26%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="188" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-xRzjqPfccQo/WN0XHtVezRI/AAAAAAAAG-w/nkV7-fUY2D0tWapaq-D6w6sXjR7XFBQdwCLcB/s400/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-30%2Bat%2B10.32.26%2BAM.png" width="400" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">The thing I got right about the above is that they were twin cubes conjoined at the common square face EFGH (the blue square). The thing I got wrong was we needed to identify that common square between the cubes. Why? By segmenting the twin cubes a mathematic comparison of their growth can be made. And the comparison of their perimeters and diagonals will give us vast opportunities to find mathematically logical places to find root 2, root 3, Phi.... There will be many places to reprise that simple "Aha, I found Phi" moment.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Every point on the above chart is mathematically determinable except points K and L. Points A, B, C, D, I and J have happened in time and space. Point E has and never will happen in time and space but it is known; it is simply the perfect midpoint in time and price between the known points A and I. The midpoint is very easy to compute; take the dates of points A and I and half the number of days between. Same for price. Points F, G and H have never happened in time or space but are easily determinable <i><b>IF </b></i>points K and L are known. For the moment, let's assume K and L are known, and, given that, points F, G and H are as easily determinable as point E.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Now it gets tricky. There are two points, K and L, in time and space that are not known but when they are known, they will complete the perfect mathematic structure of two cubes. How do I find those two points? Its tough. The two points are, themselves, functions of four unknowns; the price at point K and the price at point L and the date at each of those two points. Simultaneous linear equations. Hmm, we're dealing with exponents and roots in Pythagoras' equation...simultaneous non linear equations? Not good for a finite mathematician.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">This is where we either guess and try to optimize the structure of the twin cubes with successive guesses (simulation) or we solve it analytically via simultaneous equations, four dimensional Cartesian transformations or other methods I haven't mastered or even have hear of. So what's an educated guess?</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><i><b>Point K and the "camera </b></i><b><i>obscura"</i></b>. One might derive future point K using John Dee's "camera obscura." Consider the simple camera of 150 years ago receiving light through an aperture with it being imaged on a film...upside down and reversed left to right. Now consider square with known points ABCD is "imaged" through the perfect infinitesimally small center of square EFGH to square IJKL. Can we propose that mathematically? Can we recognize values in an already complete "square" ABCD that are near to our heart? Here's how I'd propose to image the magnitudes of the vectors of IJKL:</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-mAEDbSejjJM/WN941ycdnbI/AAAAAAAAG_E/mPKp8lzEWyQlEj4vSnNSX3dAbgjR-eHeQCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-04-01%2Bat%2B5.53.03%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="215" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-mAEDbSejjJM/WN941ycdnbI/AAAAAAAAG_E/mPKp8lzEWyQlEj4vSnNSX3dAbgjR-eHeQCLcB/s400/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-04-01%2Bat%2B5.53.03%2BAM.png" width="400" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">It would seem I want to "obscure" a very simple math operation of extrapolation the magnitudes (PTV values) of known ABCD to three unknown magnitudes of IJKL. The math is simple but the reason hardly; its the camera obscura. That there future "wants" to repeat the past in the fourth dimension but it does it not with perfection but with increasing perfection and it does not do it with the order that occurs in the third dimension. First, you see ABCD is close to the geometric ideals of 2 (the square of the hypotenuse of the 1X1 cube), close to Phi and close to root Phi. I don't believe it is coincidence. And second, the "camera obscura" reflection of ABCD onto IJKL will again be close to geometric ideals but not quite there. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">How many times did WD Gann cite "nothing new under the sun," "history repeats," and variants. How many times and in how many ways did WD Gann tell us, beginning with the all important Ticker Interview, the initial impulse resolves itself into periodic rhythm? </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">We have an initial impulse in PTV AB which imperfectly reflects itself onto AC, BD and CD according to known geometric key numbers. We have that PTV AB imperfectly halving itself to become PTV IJ. And then we have that new initial impulse IJ, in concept at least, replicating itself to JL, KL and IK via those same geometric keys.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">So how did that work out for me? Pretty well. Remember, every vector and square in the twin cubes is mathematically determinable as long as we know the presently unknown future top K and future bottom L. Since I <i><u>think</u></i> I know them, I plugged them into my deterministic model of vectors that comprise the twin cubes (that whole structure seen in the most recent chart above) and the bold italics values are what is created. Compare the three bold italic numbers to the red numbers which are the ideal extrapolation of the initial impulse, IJ. They are darn close.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">But how did I get points K and L? Again, we know the PTV IJ, we think we know the values of the other three sides of IJKL, but four sides do not make a structure. Three sides do make a determined and firm structure in the triangle, but four side values do not make a firm structure at all; you need a diagonal. And to get a diagonal, you've got to know either point K or L. I'll leave how I found point K for the next essay.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">***</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Why beans Mr. Gann? While I tout the stock market as Mr. Gann's laboratory for study of spacetime, it was not the ideal subject. Back then, the early 1900s, stocks could be manipulated by powerful men. Arguably, even the then young Dow Jones Industrials could be manipulated. And its structure as the Dow 30 was ever changing. And even now, DJIA is rebalanced. Its an index and not a natural set of data created by natural interaction.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Beans, cotton, wheat....essentials to life, markets that are everywhere in the world and this time, arguably, bigger than the ability of any single person to manipulate their value. How'd it work out for Bunky Hunt and bro when they tried to corner the much narrower and less essential to life silver market in the early '70s. Not so good when the oil billionaire was reduced to taking a bankruptcy's court fee to help sell his stockpile of art; then owned by the bankruptcy court trustee.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Beans and the DJIA...and here I am using the DJIA as my lab. Well, the DJIA and equity markets are how I got to this dance and there's a lot of conveniently accessed history for DJIA. Beans not so much. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">There are three problems with projecting point K as April 20, 2017. First, the history of DJIA is manipulated, at least, by rebalancing if not by large speculator efforts. Second, given that points K and L remain unknown, we have an infirm square. The two points are the result of four variables; two dates and two prices. Its a very complex integration or iteration to perfection or set of equations that would give us those dates. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">And most important, the subject of the experiment, the DJIA, is not a <b style="font-style: italic;">natural phenomenon. </b>Its an imperfect reflection of 30 natural markets. I believe it will lead me to the right model of the market's space time. But its imperfection must be recognized. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">As recounted in "The Ticker Interview," WD Gann did not say, for example, GM would touch some price on exactly a certain day or all this theories would be disproven. But he did with wheat. For those who do not know the story:</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-rti0-94ugus/WN-D0m3Yu8I/AAAAAAAAG_U/gDBRe75h_nwhGNBKQOlZen7_8ktH3u4kwCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-04-01%2Bat%2B6.38.28%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="130" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-rti0-94ugus/WN-D0m3Yu8I/AAAAAAAAG_U/gDBRe75h_nwhGNBKQOlZen7_8ktH3u4kwCLcB/s400/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-04-01%2Bat%2B6.38.28%2BAM.png" width="400" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Maybe there's a fourth problem; perhaps my emerging theories of spacetime (as if they are "mine" while I know others sense the correct formulations that I'm struggling to find) are wrong. That's my odd's on favorite. Still, I think I'm down the right path.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Wow, closing at 20663 yesterday, DJIA would have to go 6.8% in 15 trading days to reach 22073.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Jim Ross</div>Jimhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14728986969466359235noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6256940740610422497.post-74403934806955829332017-03-18T17:11:00.002-07:002017-03-18T17:11:55.241-07:00Current Market: Mathematic perfectionYou've seen my struggle with finding the elusive "point E;" the top of the market since the 2000 top. I believe it is determinable but I cannot discern the laws of math that make it so. <br /><br />If point E is determinable, then there must be math. It doesn't start with proving point E. We already have completed two dimensional formations that can be evaluated mathematically to see if they follow the mathematic laws of the 1X1 square and the two adjacent 1X1 squares. We have those formations in the current market; square ABCD and twin squares forming the rectangle ABGH:<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-MqwQSPun1eE/WMvUImDtKFI/AAAAAAAAG7A/Vf3tc1mB5AsOFPUTyq2qBcmQDtYf3zxeACPcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-17%2Bat%2B8.17.38%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="185" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-MqwQSPun1eE/WMvUImDtKFI/AAAAAAAAG7A/Vf3tc1mB5AsOFPUTyq2qBcmQDtYf3zxeACPcB/s400/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-17%2Bat%2B8.17.38%2BAM.png" width="400" /></a></div><br />ABCD doesn't look like a square and ABGH doesn't look like a rectangle comprised of two such squares. That's because the proposition is the structures are four dimensional solids being viewed on a two dimensional chart. Or, that's how the story goes. Supposedly, the math will tell us the truth where our vision is unable to sort out the truth.<br /><br />A very limited objective of this essay; is ABCD a square and is ABGH a rectangle comprise of twin adjacent squares. If the diagonals of ABCD is not root 2 (1.4142) of the side and/or if the diagonals of ABGH is not root 5 (2.2361) of the side, then further inquiry is, likely, unwarranted.<br /><br />The above insert is drawn using software that computes the Pythagorean Price Time Vector ("PTV") value as described in previous essays. Its calculations are dependent on how closely a visual fit of the vectors can be made. We need more accurate measurements. Following are the measurements:<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-RS6jFIhUwx4/WM2b2Dv6rOI/AAAAAAAAG70/iO_sWh34la0Pyv6f3nUSMI_Kky2orB90wCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-18%2Bat%2B4.42.46%2BPM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="138" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-RS6jFIhUwx4/WM2b2Dv6rOI/AAAAAAAAG70/iO_sWh34la0Pyv6f3nUSMI_Kky2orB90wCLcB/s400/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-18%2Bat%2B4.42.46%2BPM.png" width="400" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">The black bolded solid lines are "real vectors" On either end, they have points of price and time that have occurred. The grey lines have at least one end point that has not occurred in price and time; they are imagined and not a subject of this essay. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><i><b><u>Seeming hit or miss mathematic relationships</u></b></i>. Analysts tout their great insights by pointing out, "aha, PTV CD divided by PTV AB is within two one hundredths of the root of Phi." Or "AC divided by AB is within two one-hundredths of the number 2 and WD Gann had a thing about doubling and halving time or price." That does it, a couple isolated observations and we all think its magic...and we buy that book or course. Not that they aren't mathematically related, but they hardly create mathematic structure. On the other hand, I believe each of the ten PTVs are related to every one of the other ten. Its just that we have to go very deep into the several steps that comprise the relationships. I've done a lot of that and found several three deep relationships. Three deep where say three mathematic metrics such as root 3, root 5, Phi are required to explain the difference between two PTVs. Pass on that for now. Just realize you may see PTVs that are apparently related by a known math metric.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><i><b><u>Root 2 and the square ABCD</u></b></i>. I've overviewed this before with PTV values that were created by the charting software as opposed to rigorously determined PTV values. The above table removes any doubt:</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Ccmoai0MJCE/WM27Bp1m3sI/AAAAAAAAG8E/xVKXJwFIZvwlI_r1HnK9Wz9Y1z8Ev2jVwCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-18%2Bat%2B6.55.39%2BPM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="274" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Ccmoai0MJCE/WM27Bp1m3sI/AAAAAAAAG8E/xVKXJwFIZvwlI_r1HnK9Wz9Y1z8Ev2jVwCLcB/s320/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-18%2Bat%2B6.55.39%2BPM.png" width="320" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">The diagonals of the 1X1 square are 1.4142 (root 2) times a side of 1. That's law. If you add the four PTVs that comprise the ABCD square take their average side value and divided it by the average diagonal the result is 1.407536 or .47% less than ideal root 2. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">If you divide the sum of the four side of ABCD by the sum of its diagonals the result is .47% greater than ideal root 2.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">And the two calculations averaged are within .001% of of ideal root 2. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">I've asked before, can that be coincidence? But it doesn't end there. There is a second real configuration that we can evaluate; the double square.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><i><b><u>Root 5, root 3 and the twin adjacent cubes</u></b></i>. The "law" is that the diagonal of adjacent 1X1 squares sharing a common side will have diagonals that are root 5 times the square of one side. As the contemporary thought goes, "but its complicated." </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ENdohR2R9WI/WM2-jUOZEiI/AAAAAAAAG8U/RIofMn22ZQMivyWDbKcRgj6a796ah2ofwCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-18%2Bat%2B7.10.36%2BPM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="290" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ENdohR2R9WI/WM2-jUOZEiI/AAAAAAAAG8U/RIofMn22ZQMivyWDbKcRgj6a796ah2ofwCLcB/s320/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-18%2Bat%2B7.10.36%2BPM.png" width="320" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">We can do this lots of ways. Above we find the ave side of 1448.72 divided by the ave diagonal/root 5 is 1.315420. Or we can divide the average side by the ave diagonal to yield .5882739 and multiply by root 5 to again arrive at 1.315420.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">But 1.315420 is not the root what we expected. We'd already buried the root 5. We should have gotten the number 1, not 1.315420.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">No, that's where it is complicated. We have the fourth root of 3. Recall the primer essay on geometric solids; 3 is the center diagonal of the three dimensional 1X1X1 cube. Square 1.315420 and square it again and you have the number 3. If you leave the calculation at root 3, you find that it is within .001% of ideal root 3.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Is that coincidence?</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><u><i><b>Morphing two dimensions into an allusion of three dimensions</b></i></u>. With all this in mind, take another look at the market chart. We have a two-dimensional square near to and facing but it does not "look" like a square. Nevertheless, the math demonstrates the hallmark mathematic property of the square; its root 2 diagonals. Not just close...<i><b>but to 5 decimals</b></i>.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Now look at how the visibly appearing further away, twisting and receding rectangle ABGH morphs from vertical side AB to vertical side GH that now appears far away from us. Over that distance, both the two dimensional metric root 5 and the three dimensional root 3 have interceded to create the vector GH; a vastly diminished reflection of its opposing edge AB.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"> <u><i><b>Evolving mathematic metrics</b></i></u>. Its very unsatisfying that vector AC divided by AB is 2.02132. We want it to be a perfect 2.00000 to demonstrate the doubling and halving of time, the innermost working of the root 2 growth spiral. But it isn't. Probably every one of the vector relations is imperfect even to the point we doubt they are what they are.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">But when we aggregate them and look for the expected value, the metric we seek becomes more accurate. To wit, the ave side of ABCD divided by the ave diagonal, we get close to ideal root 2. Then, if we reverse the process with the gross sides divided by the gross diagonals, we get another measurement that's close to root 2 but in the opposite direction. Still further, when we average the two measurements, we are off from root 2 by less than 4 significant digits. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Yet one step further. The 4 significant digit error in the root 2 measurement of the ABCD square seems to be offsetting to the 4 significant digit error of the twin adjacent squares of ABGH.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Which leads to the question previously posed...as the formation matures, do measurements increasingly approach their ideal expectations? As if a larger vibration, set in motion, overshoots its mark but by decreasing margins until, ultimately, it is perfected. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">***</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">The only two geometric images of the three dimensional twin adjacent cubes are conclusively supported by the level of exact mathematic structure that, <i><b>by law</b></i>, we expect to manifest. Its not exactly as we expect because the individual PTVs are wishy washy. But their averages are not. And we have the unexpected intrusion of the three-dimensional root 3 into the mix.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">But what do you expect. We are trying to explain a four dimensional phenomenon, namely price/time, using a two-dimensional chart. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">We do not know the structure of four dimensional price/time, or at least, I don't. We can't see it or feel it or smell it. We can only imagine it. But that's what we have. We have the clues to imagine it.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Socrates' allegory of the cave and the prisoners having never been in the light see images on the wall; two-dimensional images. One prisoner leaves the cave to discover the images seemingly having only length and width have depth as well.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Painfully, C Howard Hinton in "The Fourth Dimension" (1906) develops how a being am to sense only the planar existence (length and width) can notice anomalies in his environment that leads him to conclude the existence and certain properties of the fourth dimension. Bradley Cowan relates a similar scenario in which a planar being is confronted with a vertical wheel of five colors. Of course, he can't see the tall wheel that is before him; all he can see is a color. As the wheel turns he sees the colors flash in sequence before him. After many turns of the wheel he realizes the sequence of colors repeats. He has a clue. He can't see the wheel but he knows the structure of sequence that presents itself time and again. Exact time durations and exact sequence. Its a clue.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">So, its settled, at least in my mind. The first and only two complete geometric structures in the price/time chart of DJIA from 2000 to 2017 articulate the most important properties of planar geometry to a precision that's impossible to claim as coincidence. And they introduce the third dimension as well. But most telling is their measurement is according to a yardstick comprised of both time and price according Pythagoras' 345 triangle and the Price Time Vector.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Now, back to evaluating point E. Once point E and F are projected, the entirety of the cube will be known. Perhaps point E has occurred or is yet in the imminent future. Point F certainly lies ahead.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Jim Ross</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div>Jimhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14728986969466359235noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6256940740610422497.post-79123132572556837372017-03-17T06:24:00.001-07:002017-03-17T06:27:08.058-07:00Current Market: Indication of the loose threadThe previous essay indicated the math according the first formulation of twin cubes did not seem to work out as expected and that both cloned ellipses and an alternate formulation of the twin cubes suggests a final new all-time high in DJIA on about April 27, 2017 at above DJIA 22000. The latter suggestion of a new all-time-high was based on a visual fitting of the 2000-09 square ABCD and has been updated by a more, but not entirely, mathematic triangulation of point E (the suggested final all-time-high) at DJIA 22300 on May 2, 2017. Again, this revised calculation is a better "biangulation" of point E but remains not entirely mathematic in its derivation. Here's the revised chart:<br /><div><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-MqwQSPun1eE/WMvUImDtKFI/AAAAAAAAG68/rKyKPDRfZzgWpaKlrCcyGvbzGICFT4guQCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-17%2Bat%2B8.17.38%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="185" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-MqwQSPun1eE/WMvUImDtKFI/AAAAAAAAG68/rKyKPDRfZzgWpaKlrCcyGvbzGICFT4guQCLcB/s400/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-17%2Bat%2B8.17.38%2BAM.png" width="400" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">What early tip-offs did I have that March 1 was not the final top for the 2000-17 cube? First and as previously noted, I should have recognized, by my own chart, the cloned cubes B and C axes did not form a perfect, overlapping straight line with their enveloping ellipse A:</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-zCPCHXw-m5c/WMp67Xa3fZI/AAAAAAAAG6k/nrUEPt6CTdYZMunjbqI26sf1NktfMe2XACPcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-16%2Bat%2B7.45.03%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="183" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-zCPCHXw-m5c/WMp67Xa3fZI/AAAAAAAAG6k/nrUEPt6CTdYZMunjbqI26sf1NktfMe2XACPcB/s400/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-16%2Bat%2B7.45.03%2BAM.png" width="400" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Second, I should have noticed from my own chart of the period 2009-present, not previously shown, has some imperfect math:</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-xSjqqIaT1Bo/WMvdsW13_eI/AAAAAAAAG7Y/vcB-xIfEy3cQ8s40nvZQO-CCNWE6bxNGACLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-17%2Bat%2B8.57.48%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="186" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-xSjqqIaT1Bo/WMvdsW13_eI/AAAAAAAAG7Y/vcB-xIfEy3cQ8s40nvZQO-CCNWE6bxNGACLcB/s400/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-17%2Bat%2B8.57.48%2BAM.png" width="400" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Sectioning PTV's CE and DE according to the intersection of the 2007 price high and actual price results in components of those vectors that appear to be edging closer and closer to ideal root 3 and root 2:</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-I9YINb25yzY/WMvesMO0z9I/AAAAAAAAG7k/LQMcaaCN1As45tcMOj98XvNgPjQXG-4ywCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-17%2Bat%2B9.03.10%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="82" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-I9YINb25yzY/WMvesMO0z9I/AAAAAAAAG7k/LQMcaaCN1As45tcMOj98XvNgPjQXG-4ywCLcB/s400/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-17%2Bat%2B9.03.10%2BAM.png" width="400" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">But they have not reached root 3 and 2 ideals...yet. Recall the mathematic significance of root 3, the center diagonal of the 1X1X1 cube (3 dimensions) and root 2, the diagonal of the 1X1 square (2 dimensions). By establishing a new higher high in the not distant future, the subdivisions of CE and DE will inch closer to the Platonic ideals.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Isn't this intuitively attractive according to WD Gann commentaries on how we expect "vibration" to reach its mathematic extreme before some new shock or impulse or predetermined mathematic extreme reverses the market?</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">I should have known earlier, that a marginally new high is needed to perfect the math. It was the loose thread at that moment that I did not follow. Now, is the point E I seek, the newly identified point E at DJIA 22300 on May 2, 2017? That's my best "biangulation" at the moment.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Still working on the math. I expect a still finer point E projection and math that will support (or refute) the model of the market structure shown in the chart at the very top of the page.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">And then the question will become, what is the correct point F...the next pivot bottom counterpart of point E top?</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Jim Ross</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div>Jimhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14728986969466359235noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6256940740610422497.post-28407912241616505222017-03-16T05:33:00.002-07:002017-03-16T05:33:31.546-07:00Current Market: The math didn't workAs I'd asserted, the validity of the below market formulation of four market points (points A, B, C, D) in price/time supporting a fifth future point (point E) depends upon their mathematic and geometric interdependence. The five points, forming vectors between each set of points, <b><i>must</i></b> demonstrate the mathematics of adjacent 1X1 cubes adjusted for growth.<div><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-lHgd6ptTBoE/WMZt2I8STZI/AAAAAAAAG54/iWSB90rPn_ksJ2hTApswOtAFEGeWJ0czgCPcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-13%2Bat%2B5.58.02%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="182" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-lHgd6ptTBoE/WMZt2I8STZI/AAAAAAAAG54/iWSB90rPn_ksJ2hTApswOtAFEGeWJ0czgCPcB/s400/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-13%2Bat%2B5.58.02%2BAM.png" width="400" /></a></div><div><br /></div><div>If the mathematics worked out for every so formed vector of the many, then point E would be indicated as the final high of the 17 years since the DJIA January 2000 high.</div><div><br /></div><div>After hours, days of working the math, many of the relationships among the many vectors formed by the four points and one prospective points do not work or work in a way that is contrary to the laws of the adjacent 1X1 cubes. My conclusion is that point E or the DJIA March 1, 2017 high, is not the final high in DJIA. Were I a bit more diligent I would have noted the closeness of the adjacent cloned ellipses featured in one of the first posts in the "Current Market" series:</div><div><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-zCPCHXw-m5c/WMp67Xa3fZI/AAAAAAAAG6g/RPt8UID5xBQorXbpHtm1numvHFmvrtMhACLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-16%2Bat%2B7.45.03%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="183" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-zCPCHXw-m5c/WMp67Xa3fZI/AAAAAAAAG6g/RPt8UID5xBQorXbpHtm1numvHFmvrtMhACLcB/s400/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-16%2Bat%2B7.45.03%2BAM.png" width="400" /></a></div><div><br /></div><div>I'd noticed it before. The inscribed ellipses B and C axes (bold purple lines) do not adjoin to form a perfectly straight line. The axis of the enclosing ellipse A (bold dashed lines) is be the adjoining of the inscribed eclipses axes. A detail or loose thread. I should have known.</div><div><br /></div><div>The three ellipses' axes present configuration suggest to me another marginal high that will result in the inscribed, perfectly equal ellipses forming a perfectly straight line overlapping the axis of the axis of the greater ellipse A. Think about it. Point E moves up very slightly to yet a new all-time-high, large ellipse rotates up to point E and inscribed ellipse C rotates up to point E. All three ellipses now have overlapping central axes that overlap and extend the axis of ellipse B.</div><div><br /></div><div>That's visual and visual is perception and perception is subjective. As a finite mathematician I rail against perception and subjectivity. Failing with my mathematics, I'm using a subjective tool to prove myself wrong. No, the math didn't prove my rendition of the cubes as correct.</div><div><br /></div><div>When first I posted the twin cubes, a commenter, perhaps innocently <i><b>or</b></i> perhaps with greater insight that I then had, asked the question, "Where is the back side of the second cube formed?" And I believe, in retrospect, he is right. Here is the re-imagined formation of the adjacent cubes:</div><div><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-dqA5GaLmv1k/WMp-wEmQVBI/AAAAAAAAG6s/5z3-g9QXN8A1G33SNh0_oFxjy_fr2erYQCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-16%2Bat%2B8.01.32%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="186" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-dqA5GaLmv1k/WMp-wEmQVBI/AAAAAAAAG6s/5z3-g9QXN8A1G33SNh0_oFxjy_fr2erYQCLcB/s400/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-16%2Bat%2B8.01.32%2BAM.png" width="400" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Concentrate on the bold black (real) and bod grey (imagined) lines that outline two cubes sharing a center side that twist from their side nearest us (square side ABCD) and rear side furthest from us (square side EFGH). </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">I have tentative math that suggests point E, the higher high, will occur April 27 at just over DJIA 22,000. The math is a visual fitting of the above vectors and the "camera obscura" projection of square ABCD and its component triangles to imagined square EFGH and its component triangles.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">["Camera obscura" is a favored optical/geometric concept of the 17th century mathematician, scientist, physicist, alchemist, philosopher of the court of Queen Elizabeth I, John Dee. Dee is a name that appears 45 times in the acrostic and telestic encoding of WD Gann's "The Tunnel Thru the Air," 44 times as the word "Dee" and once, perfectly between the first and second 22 occurrences as "007." The James Bond of the 17th century was, indeed, John Dee and "007" was John Dee's signature to Queen Elizabeth I in their secret and coded correspondence. See <a href="http://markettimeandpricetownhall.blogspot.com/2015/11/philo-bacon-dee-sherlock-and-wd-gann.html" target="_blank">HERE</a>. John Dee's relation to "camera obscure" is well documented in Jim Egan's ebook on the geometry of the Monas Hieroglyphic found <a href="http://newporttowermuseum.com/resources/3-The-Meaning-of-the-Monas-Hieroglyphica-with-regards-to-Geometry.pdf" target="_blank">HERE</a>.] </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">The image of the twisted cubes can be modeled in mathematics. If its a valid formulation, then the many vectors formed by real points ABCD and imagined point E will demonstrate the metrics of the two-Platonic 1X1 cubes augmented by growth. And if it is a valid mathematic formulation, the triangulation of point E based on points G and H and the projected "camera obscura" image of square ABCD to square EFGH will give us a perfected price and time projection of exactly where the market will top. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">If I know myself, I'll first mathematically project point E. Only after having the exciting answer as to whether and exactly where (price and time) the market tops, I'll test the many vectors to see if the math supports the above formulation. This is otherwise known as "cart before the horse."</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">If it doesn't work, I'll continue to work. If it does, I'll continue to work.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Jim Ross</div><div><br /></div>Jimhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14728986969466359235noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6256940740610422497.post-51960266162387483202017-03-13T05:11:00.001-07:002017-03-13T05:11:49.589-07:00Current Market: I hate it when "there is a loose thread in the world."To put the subtitle of this essay in context, its from Mark Gattis' and the BBC's rendition of "Sherlock Holmes; The Six Thatchers," season 4 episode 1. Further context, Sherlock, Dr. John Watson and Inspector Lestrade are visiting with the parents whose son was tragically lost when Sherlock rudely leaves the couple to stare at an inexplicable detail of the room; an apparent (to Sherlock) table dedicated to Margaret Thatcher with a gap in between pictures and an irregularity in dust patterns. From the transcript that can be viewed in its entirety <a href="http://arianedevere.livejournal.com/86813.html" target="_blank">HERE</a>:<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-XKO8XcLyn74/WMUyjkadf7I/AAAAAAAAG30/JUQh77Ew_W0HIPpa_RSSskhmqBj0zAS1ACLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-12%2Bat%2B7.29.21%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="83" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-XKO8XcLyn74/WMUyjkadf7I/AAAAAAAAG30/JUQh77Ew_W0HIPpa_RSSskhmqBj0zAS1ACLcB/s400/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-12%2Bat%2B7.29.21%2BAM.png" width="400" /></a></div><br />[FYI, "By the pricking of my thumbs, Something wicked this way comes" is from "Macbeth" and linked to <a href="http://www.encyclopedia.com/humanities/dictionaries-thesauruses-pictures-and-press-releases/pricking-ones-thumbs" target="_blank">HERE</a>.]<br /><br />From the table, Sherlock deduces a bust of Margaret Thatcher had been positioned there but had been removed, most likely broken....but not broken next to the table because there was a thick area rug. A loose thread, where had the bust been broken? Why steal a bust not having substantial apparent value in a house (semi mansion) having, no doubt, many valuable and marketable items?<br /><br />As the trio are leaving the home Sherlock stops on the porch to examine something he'd seen on the porch when they first arrived and this exchange occurs:<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-KUsNcCFckpI/WMU6vhGHI-I/AAAAAAAAG4E/E2ZYfJ8Omd8MyOodZMMmITJoBe8v9IOlwCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-12%2Bat%2B7.50.14%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="83" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-KUsNcCFckpI/WMU6vhGHI-I/AAAAAAAAG4E/E2ZYfJ8Omd8MyOodZMMmITJoBe8v9IOlwCLcB/s400/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-12%2Bat%2B7.50.14%2BAM.png" width="400" /></a></div><br />Noteworthy,<i> Intuition</i>; data processed too fast for the conscious mind to comprehend. <i>Loose threads</i>, details without identified connections to the puzzle and solution that must exist. Arthur Conan Doyle was a spiritualist and his Sherlock did not miss details even if their connections were not apparent. Mark Gatiss' Sherlock is equally attendant to inexplicable details and ever more so the believer that something deeper than the mind is at work in each of us.<br /><br />Details. First, the market cube chart for convenience:<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-lHgd6ptTBoE/WMZt2I8STZI/AAAAAAAAG5w/noeT9sJPpn8QLAcmjtRYfBt0pvLU6W6DgCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-13%2Bat%2B5.58.02%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="146" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-lHgd6ptTBoE/WMZt2I8STZI/AAAAAAAAG5w/noeT9sJPpn8QLAcmjtRYfBt0pvLU6W6DgCLcB/s320/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-13%2Bat%2B5.58.02%2BAM.png" width="320" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Now the 10 PTVs and values in tabular form:</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-9-EMaXysvGs/WMU_DhQNjGI/AAAAAAAAG4Q/YeMIUDTKZfosgvY_z8-HGs8DIdRnCbmvQCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-12%2Bat%2B8.28.16%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="102" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-9-EMaXysvGs/WMU_DhQNjGI/AAAAAAAAG4Q/YeMIUDTKZfosgvY_z8-HGs8DIdRnCbmvQCLcB/s400/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-12%2Bat%2B8.28.16%2BAM.png" width="400" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><i><b>Pythagoras' root 2</b></i>. The first "structural aha" was discussed in the previous essay; if ABCD were a square in perspective then I'd suspect it would relate to its diagonals....and it did. In the table above the average side length is 948 and extended by root 2 becomes 1334 (within 6). Perhaps the diagonals of any four-sided structure will demonstrate such a relation; at least, any two-dimensional, space measurement only structure. But this is a price/time measurement structure. Regardless, the math worked exactly as I expected.<br /><br /><i><b>Vindication of Leonardo de Pisa' Phi</b></i>. An early iteration of Fibonacci series is 3 and then 5 giving us an early and easily recognized iteration of Phi at 3 / 5 = .60 or its inverse of 1.666. Look at the diagonals (of square ABCD and the two squares) and note how they subdivide:<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-7wB1CiYOGAg/WMVq8VcZYdI/AAAAAAAAG4w/DcsZ-D2RAu4iW_O8ThaJULgUTDARZlougCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-12%2Bat%2B11.35.40%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="140" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-7wB1CiYOGAg/WMVq8VcZYdI/AAAAAAAAG4w/DcsZ-D2RAu4iW_O8ThaJULgUTDARZlougCLcB/s400/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-12%2Bat%2B11.35.40%2BAM.png" width="400" /></a></div>The earliest iteration of Phi in the chart which occurs chronologically before the later versions emerge is a crude approximation. It is the relation of the diagonals of square ABCD at 1.6790 or its reciprocal .5956. I thought this was an "aha" moment but it just didn't seem close enough.<br /><br />And then I applied the Phi subdivision to the combined values of the two diagonals of the cube and found them to be much close to a Fibonacci 5 / 3 arrangement; 1.6662 and its reciprocal .6002. Within mere 10 thousandths of perfection.<br /><br />What might be gleaned? Obviously Phi is at work. But more comforting, just as the Fibonacci series iterates closer and closer to theoretic Phi, so perhaps the market's early iterations of the mathematic goal to which it strives becomes more refined as the structure is formed. <br /><br /><i><b>More details</b></i>. Phi, root 2 and 2, Pi, root 3 and 3.... all over the place. Here are just a few:<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-0F8pn-Z5qg8/WMWNCMaDm1I/AAAAAAAAG5A/WlnG9HQ5wvMcHvQPekgFEHdcbRHPcQClQCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-12%2Bat%2B2.00.48%2BPM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="227" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-0F8pn-Z5qg8/WMWNCMaDm1I/AAAAAAAAG5A/WlnG9HQ5wvMcHvQPekgFEHdcbRHPcQClQCLcB/s400/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-12%2Bat%2B2.00.48%2BPM.png" width="400" /></a></div><br /><i><b>The square ABCD and Root 2 revisited</b></i>. Recall the early "aha" in discovering the sum of the four sides of ABCD divided by the sum of its two diagonals provided 1. To be honest, I was a bit disappointed that average diagonals divided by average sides was 1.4068 compared to ideal root 2, that being 1.4142. But there may yet be a happy ending. Let's look at that same averaging number but let's also look at the reciprocal of the gross PTV values of sides and diagonals:<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-TDWg7gGSd8s/WMaLHKZNV5I/AAAAAAAAG6A/-t_eQxDryPAjEHSqrB1-c8NzmIHga-gPACLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-13%2Bat%2B8.05.14%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="273" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-TDWg7gGSd8s/WMaLHKZNV5I/AAAAAAAAG6A/-t_eQxDryPAjEHSqrB1-c8NzmIHga-gPACLcB/s320/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-13%2Bat%2B8.05.14%2BAM.png" width="320" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">The sides of that twisted, supposed square ABCD in perspective relate to its diagonals by the ideal root 2 to the 4th significant digit. Perfection.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Is that a coincidence?</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">***</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">I'm sure there are "details" above that are invalid, though seemingly close. In those law does not require that they work out as they did; we have true coincidence. The above represents but maybe a half day of searching. A more disciplined and instinctive searcher than myself would find many more relations than did I.; many more "loose threads" I suspect.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Some "intuitive" thoughts:</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><i>Does the development of and 'end game' in the current market correspond the perfection of Phi or other metric among PTVs?</i> Take Fibonacci 3/5 or .60. The diagonals of the sides of square ABCD, AD and BC are sectioned in to imperfect but recognizable .4044 and .5956. Those vectors are complete early on in the current market, point D having completed in March 2009. Much later on, vectors AE and DE complete (prospectively) in March 2017 and relate to one another again by Phi. At this latter endpoint, a more accurate reflection of Fibonacci 3/5, that being .3998 (DE /(AE+DE)) and .6002, has developed.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Does the market, as it vibrates, exceed the Phi mark on an early swing and with each successive swing miss the mark by less and less until the Phi mark is substantially perfected? Can a new marginal high create yet greater perfection of Phi between diagonal PTVs AD and BC or the Phi relation between two side PTV CE relative to center of cube diagonal BE (2734/(2734+1681)=.6193)?</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><i>Did March 1, 2017 print the final high of the structure that began in January 2000? </i>What happens to all these market measurements, which seem to have found perfection in their four PTVs AE, CE, BE and DE, if point E makes a higher high?</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Which are the more sensitive PTVs in seeking Phi perfection; the pair of AE and DE face diagonals or the pair of the two sides vector CE and cube center diagonal BE. The former are very close to perfection of the Fibonacci 5 / 3 iteration of Phi (presently at .6002) while the latter are far less perfected of the ideal Phi at .618 (presently at .6193).</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><i>Another all-time-high, only if marginal, or is it close enough to structural perfection? A loose thread that perhaps some sensitivity analysis might answer but which will surely be answered in time.</i></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Jim Ross</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><br />Jimhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14728986969466359235noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6256940740610422497.post-14610096411472170172017-03-12T04:26:00.001-07:002017-03-12T04:26:18.209-07:00Current Market: Adding to the mathematic "aha's" and hints of mathematic market structure"Every market high and low is caused by another point in the market." Or at least, that's the belief that WD Gann expressed dozens of times. That there is a cause and effect in everything and markets are not exempt.<br /><br />And that's what I'm increasingly finding in the current DJIA from the 2000 top. Beginning with the 2000 top and ending with the present all-time-high of only a week ago, there are 5 market market pivots. Those points are each related to the other by the market metrics which were presented <a href="http://markettimeandpricetownhall.blogspot.com/2017/03/current-market-primer-for-understanding.html" target="_blank">HERE</a>. No, ladies and gentlemen, we aren't talking about a "Gann fan" or Phi spaced support and resistance levels...stuff that shows there are rhythms and approximate cycles but which are woefully short in saying "this is the one price and the one time." We are talking about structured mathematics between each of those 5 in price/time; the one and only price at the one and only one time. <br /><br />And lest we forget; the stock market was only Mr. Gann's laboratory of spacetime in my humble opinion. This time I'll give you the exact quotation:<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-GMjkqr-1b_0/WMRV7pgOH8I/AAAAAAAAG3E/eWwhnadx-ngxhWOAGg4OXPYodqGHFNCZQCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-11%2Bat%2B2.52.41%2BPM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="47" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-GMjkqr-1b_0/WMRV7pgOH8I/AAAAAAAAG3E/eWwhnadx-ngxhWOAGg4OXPYodqGHFNCZQCLcB/s400/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-11%2Bat%2B2.52.41%2BPM.png" width="400" /></a></div><br />In my suspicion, Mr. Gann had, by the time of that quote, already worked out the four-dimensional structure of the market and had, as well, applied that mathematics to personal and world events using the Law of Vibration and Luo Clements' (imo, WD Gann) methodology. Remember also from the Ticker Interview that stocks are like the elements of the Periodic Table; they can be classified by their "number" and those within a class of similarity behave similarly. Didn't Luo classify names by number and specify that those of the same class (3,6,9 or 2,5,7, etc) react and behave similarly? So, if I or someone am ever able to specify the mathematical structure of the market with Mssrs. Gann and Cowan's instruction, that's only a minute beginning. The market is the "simple" case. Its the amoeba in the petrie. <br /><br />Now, back to the "aha's" of the current market. There are so many "aha's" in the 17 years of the current market I'm overwhelmed. Of the 5 real price/time points (A, B, C, D and prospective E), each is the original for at least 4 Price Time Vectors (PTV). Those vectors from each point are mathematically related to one another. And because those PTVs joint at other real price/time points, <i><b>every PTV must be related to every other PTV</b></i>. It is just a matter of taking the time to figure out the math. <br /><br />We're talking about a lot of time to work out all the math. If we have 10 real vectors and every one is related to the other then there are a lot of combinations and a lot of relationships to work out. Perhaps 10 factorial or 10X9X8X7X6X5X4X3X2X1 = 3.63M relationships? No, that's not right because order is not a factor. Maybe its 10! less 9! Still, 90 relationships is a lot to assess. Regrettably, I do not recall from that statistics class from 40 years ago in combinations, permutations and probability the model that needs to be applied here but its only a confirmation of what I intuitively know; there are a lot of "aha's" that can be worked out from this exercise. I will only rigorously and completely work out one of the PTVs that are associated with one point and a couple more of interest and of necessity. To start, let's reprise the current market chart:<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-DENZG317fjQ/WMRbnRgwUSI/AAAAAAAAG3U/DewT5W61UN0Dlp80ciBs6n5ZIxwjtQ1PACLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-11%2Bat%2B3.18.16%2BPM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="180" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-DENZG317fjQ/WMRbnRgwUSI/AAAAAAAAG3U/DewT5W61UN0Dlp80ciBs6n5ZIxwjtQ1PACLcB/s400/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-11%2Bat%2B3.18.16%2BPM.png" width="400" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">You'll see in red text the relationships I teased you with in the previous essay. A couple are "duh aha's" that any semi mathematic observer can ferret out. For example, the first red "aha" is CE divided by CD is equal to two. Well, not so much because it is equal to 2.07 to be more accurate. I give that a teaser "aha." A little closer is AC / AB = 1.98. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">What's the big deal about PTVs having a relationship in magnitude of 2? Its the root 2 growth spiral in nature. A biologic cell at it base level divides itself into exactly two parts. A 1X1 square divides itself by replicating its 1.414 hypotenuse to form a square with sides of 1.414 and exactly twice the area of the 1X1 square; that being 2. That 1.414X1.414 square; what's its hypotenuse? It is sqrt(1.414^2 + 1.414^2) =....you got it...it 2. Finding vectors relationships to one another of 2 implies the root 2 growth spiral is as Mr. Gann might say "at work in the market."</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Now lets use some averaging to sniff out some structural relations. Its very disappointing that the supposed square ABCD has sides, none of which are equal. And the diagonals aren't equal nor doe either of them extrapolate from any given side that would indicate squareness of the sides. Go to the fourth of the four red "aha's" above. You are summing the diagonals of BC and AD and dividing by the sum of the four sides. The math:</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-oKI6bR-1t8k/WMRhHUW5mdI/AAAAAAAAG3k/7N9NEiboCC8V5VES7PFNKjyjDubRuxBTwCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-11%2Bat%2B3.41.29%2BPM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="198" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-oKI6bR-1t8k/WMRhHUW5mdI/AAAAAAAAG3k/7N9NEiboCC8V5VES7PFNKjyjDubRuxBTwCLcB/s320/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-11%2Bat%2B3.41.29%2BPM.png" width="320" /></a></div><br />That's one of the first "aha's" that told me I was on the right track towards confirming the market struct that Mr. Cowan asserted <i><b>must</b></i> be present. The average of the two diagonals divided by the four sides is 1.4068, comfortably close to the relation of the hypotenuse of the 1X1 square to one side or 1.414 (root 2). It worked <i>kinda</i> like I thought it must work according to the perhaps the grandfather of all laws; the Pythagorean 345 triangle and the calculation of it hypotenuse.<br /><br />Do you understand the importance of the above? Its not like, "wow, price hit the Phi retrace and reverse" when it happens 1 out of 10 times or 1 out of five or its hits one of the several Phi levels. <i><b>The proposition was, if ABCD is actually a square in a tangled, twisted perspective view that defies the limitations of what we can visually interpret, then its diagonals must relate to the sides by 1.414.</b></i> It couldn't be otherwise...and was not.<br /><br />So why are the sides not equal? Well, we know they never (well, pretty much never) are in the market. Having already worked out many of the 90, or whatever, unique vectorial relations, I know the difference is the many growth spirals that are simultaneously occurring. I've seen enough to know, those four sides of the supposed ABCD square are mathematically related, by some permutation of a growth spiral or market metric, to each other and every one of the other 9 real vectors. It's law.<br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;">***</div><br />Do you see where I am going? If the four points and associated vectors of square ABCD are mathematically related to those four vectors that connect them to hypothetical point E (e.g. PTVs AE, CE, BE and DE), well, point E is mathematically determined.... it is determinable. <br /><br />If you caught the "*" notation of the previous essay, point E in three dimensional space can be predicted from three fixed points. You know, all the action movies have the detective asking the cellular folks to "triangulate" the bad guys cell phone. In two dimensions, you only need two points and a vector of fixed magnitude. With those givens, point E can be determined from PTV AE and AD or from PTV BE and AD or from PTV CE and AE..... And all of those PTVs' magnitude are mathematically determinable from points ABC and D. <br /><br /><i><b>Once the low of March 2009 occurred, the die was cast for Point E; both time and price.</b></i><br /><br />No, I have not worked them all out nor have I codified how the growth spirals will work to create a model of the structure. There's a lot of work yet to done in this laboratory.<br /><br />Next up, I'll go over some simple "aha's" and implication. Further down the road, I'll take point A and look at the mathematic relations between the four vectors that radiate from it; AE, AC, AD and AB. That's where I suspect we will first begin to codify the structure of price/time.<br /><br />What is the cause and what is the mathematically consequent effect?<br /><br />Jim Ross<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Jimhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14728986969466359235noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6256940740610422497.post-58988275235455712482017-03-11T04:10:00.004-08:002017-03-11T04:47:51.216-08:00Current market: The mathematic landscapeIf you saw the next previous essay on the <a href="http://markettimeandpricetownhall.blogspot.com/2017/03/symmetry-of-post-2009-bottom-market.html" target="_blank">symmetry of the current market</a> a natural reaction by many of us to the presentation of ellipses might be... "something has ended"... at the March 1 all time high. We like symmetry, its human nature. But its subjective. Likewise, when we see a sophisticated application of Phi support and resistance, we are blown away by the apparent knowledge of the author. What an "aha" moment when you see the market reacting to Phi for the first time! I plead immensely guilty. It speaks to our nature that when a researcher finds similarities of tops and bottoms along with a magical number that we are persuaded. But those coincidences, conflated to systems and methods, are not according to natural <i>law</i>. They're according to an accumulation of coincidence; scant accumulations at that. They might repeat somewhat better than 50%...which is good. Don't get me wrong, if systems of coincidence tilt the odds favorably, its good. <br /><br />But a web of coincidence is not mathematic, geometric natural <i>law</i>. That makes anything other than natural law largely subjective....hunch. Law, on the other hand, means it is inerrantly objective and predictive. Its cause and effect. <br /><br />Let's look at the mathematics of the current market, use Bradley Cowan's adjacent cubes structure of the market and his Price Time Vector (PTV) measurement given the proper squaring (see the previous essay). Let's see if there is a preponderance of the "great numbers;" not just Phi, but root 2, root 3, root 5, Pi.... Here's the chart:<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-cNYYVKqosaI/WMPwk2JLEaI/AAAAAAAAG20/S9-WwvhvTqYzwywigFLSsvtj04iho8agQCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-11%2Bat%2B7.40.04%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="186" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-cNYYVKqosaI/WMPwk2JLEaI/AAAAAAAAG20/S9-WwvhvTqYzwywigFLSsvtj04iho8agQCLcB/s400/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-11%2Bat%2B7.40.04%2BAM.png" width="400" /></a></div><br />Let me describe it. First, its two adjacent cubes and it is a perspective drawing that reflects the "moving location of the observer" or, alternately, the "moving location of market points relative to the stationary observer." Solid black lines connect 5 specific market tops and bottoms (January 2000 top, October 2002 bottom, October 2007 top, March 2009 bottom March 2017...err something). I call the 5 solid black lines "real" because each connects two real price/time points. The remainder of the black lines are dashed and I call them "imagined" lines. They help us (me) in visualizing <i><b>the mathematics</b></i><i><b>, the structure of law,</b></i><i><b> that must be taking place,</b></i> if the market has formed adjacent cubes as Bradley theorizes.<br /><br />In addition to the apparently differing lengths of the solid black lines are colored dashed lines; two blue dashed lines representing the two diagonals of the square, two red dashed lines representing two of the four face diagonals that span two cubes in length, and one purple dashed line that traverses the center diagonal of the two cubes.<br /><br />So how many "real" lines do we have? We have 10 since the colored diagonals all have market endpoints. There are 5 real points in price/time named A, B, C, D and E and there are 10 real vectors that are created by those 5 points.<br /><br />Now one last item for this introduction. Look at vector AB; at near its midpoint is the number 648.27. The software (Cycletimer) has computed the PTV value given points A and B <i>and</i> the squaring parameters that I have shown at the top left of the chart; the change in trading days X 6.5 hrs per day X .10 and the change in price X .10. Those are the same squaring parameters I used in the previous essay to compute vector AB's PTV value. Computed in the previous essay the value was 650.27 whereas the software computed 648.27. Obviously the mathematic calculation is preferable. The software works fine but the vectors are visually fitted to the high and low points and some small differences are introduced. A small price to pay to be able to fit vectors and create scenarios visually.<br /><br />I've added some teaser equations. There are perhaps two dozen numerical "aha's" in the above chart I'm sure. I've probably discovered two dozen at this point. And I've added in red 5 of those discoveries. I've added them to whet your taste for what's to come.<br /><br />Its not the number of "aha's" that are important; its the structure. Unless Bradley Cowan was deluded in his description of the importance the cube, the importance of the two adjacent cubes and the importance of root 5 (an aspect of two adjacent cubes, we should see mathematic structure in this chart. We should see the measurements and metrics described in the previous essay unfold in order to one another. Since the chart progresses left to right according to time, the mathematics unfold in that order. If we see a certain configuration of math occur in the market today, then, according to the mathematic structure of the Platonic solid being formed by the market we should see the next dependent mathematic aspect unfold in the successive market movements. Structure creates expectation...creates determination.<br /><br />Work through the five teasers in red and see if we are not producing a variety of the mathematic metrics presented in the first essay. Take any of the 10 PTV values showing on the chart or all of them and recalculate them to keep me honest; its the same calc that derived the 650.27 value of PTV AB in the previous essay.<br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;">***</div><div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">Next up I'll develop more of the preponderance of "aha" metrics of the adjacent cubes and perhaps categorize them. Two essays from now I expect to describe the structure of adjacent cubes using the metrics created and our expectations created by the math of the adjacent cubes.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">I'm not sure I will take the analysis into a final essay using structure and metrics to predict, retrospectively compute point E in the current market. Prediction will, at that point, be only a matter of triangulation. Think about that. </div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;"><i>If points A, B, C and D and the structure of the adjacent cubes can derive our expectations of the values of PTVs AE, BE, CE and DE, is not determining future point E just a matter of triangulation*? </i> </div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">Well, that's the plan. Let's see how far I get.<br /><br />Jim Ross<br /><br />*Finding a point in three dimensions requires 3 points and three vector to find a fourth point and is called triangulation. But market charts are two dimensions; we need only two points and two vectors to find a point. When I use the word "triangulation" it is only to connote the mathematic fixation of an otherwise unknown price and time. The "tri" would be more appropriately "duo" or "bi" and hence,"duoangulation" or "biangulation."</div>Jimhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14728986969466359235noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6256940740610422497.post-66338854226305709352017-03-09T11:46:00.000-08:002017-03-09T11:46:16.822-08:00Current Market: A primer for understanding the current market since the 2009 bottomThe title overstates my competence to present the findings in the next several essays. Anything I present is based upon the works of WD Gann and Bradley Cowan, his derivations from WD Gann and further discoveries of natural law. None of the following essays is my work other than the application of what they instructed. Lest you believe my insights are valid by associating my findings with the genius of these men, what follows is my continuing attempt to understand the structure of the market and, moreover, the structure of spacetime. I've proven fallibility. Despite the proof of the structure of spacetime provided by WD Gann and the 'abc' s of the four-dimensional structure of spacetime reduced to two and three-dimensional geometry, my work cannot be relied to be valid at this point. On the other hand, if you are a mathematician, you've got to go "hmmm." Remember, I'm a finite mathematician, an accountant...just a wannabe. Be gentle with me.<div><br /></div><div>Because many (most) readers are even less savvy with geometry than I, this post is a primer for essays on the geometry of the current market. It will cover relevant metrics of two and three-dimensional structure. I will be brief so you need to refer to high school level and freshmen geometry texts (believe me, I had to retrain myself).</div><div><br /></div><div><i><b>Metrics of the square (two dimension) and cube (three dimension)</b></i>. Derived by the 1X1 square ABCD, diagonal AC is the square root of the square of two sides each squared or 1.4142. AC is the square root of 2. Derived from the 1X1X1 cube, the center diagonal AE is the similar square root of one side and one diagonal or 1.7321. AE is the square root of 3. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-SCrpn5scz4M/WMFa4p1Nv1I/AAAAAAAAG0w/_uTMfgvegOYWergyHQ7foadl6CxWEgWGQCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-09%2Bat%2B8.38.20%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="197" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-SCrpn5scz4M/WMFa4p1Nv1I/AAAAAAAAG0w/_uTMfgvegOYWergyHQ7foadl6CxWEgWGQCLcB/s400/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-09%2Bat%2B8.38.20%2BAM.png" width="400" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><i><b>Double squares and the root five growth expansion</b></i>. Two equal cubes sharing a common planar side have important interrelated metrics and demonstrate the relation of growth spirals of Phi (1.6180) and root five (2.2360). The following is my rendition of Bradley Cowan's illustration found on page 51 of "Four Dimensional Stock Market Structures and Cycles" ("Four D" for short):</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-w6PziBZykh0/WMGTtHmKcRI/AAAAAAAAG1w/ppEZrhT-kU4euKO3MYXCU699qr5d7x53QCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-09%2Bat%2B12.40.27%2BPM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="151" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-w6PziBZykh0/WMGTtHmKcRI/AAAAAAAAG1w/ppEZrhT-kU4euKO3MYXCU699qr5d7x53QCLcB/s400/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-09%2Bat%2B12.40.27%2BPM.png" width="400" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Phi and root five and mathematically and geometrically related. In fact, Mr. Cowan refers to root five as more important than Phi in the market. Moreover, analysts are frequently misled by the more readily identifiable footprints of Phi (square root of Phi, Phi squared, etc) when the more important growth spiral in the market is the root five spiral.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><i><b>Adjacent cubes</b></i>. One last metric for now; the center diagonal of adjacent cubes or root six. I expect this metric to occur in the 2009 to present market, but have not derived it as yet. In the ideal world, here is one way you'd derive it:</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-GmSzHnnX2Zw/WMGApeHH2wI/AAAAAAAAG1Q/OVCNgsjiYrYJGXawCVoWmz0nWhHuBUzbgCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-09%2Bat%2B11.17.40%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="183" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-GmSzHnnX2Zw/WMGApeHH2wI/AAAAAAAAG1Q/OVCNgsjiYrYJGXawCVoWmz0nWhHuBUzbgCLcB/s400/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-09%2Bat%2B11.17.40%2BAM.png" width="400" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><i><b>And a tool; the measurement value of a spacetime vector</b></i>. As trademarked by Bradley Cowan as the "Price Time Vector" or "PTV, the PTV is an application of Pythagoras' formula for the hypotenuse of the 3-4-5 triangle. Simply:</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-GBf2Z5KEHmY/WMGHKQi0UaI/AAAAAAAAG1g/3c-13DA9FNkUEoJ26nSZ7nqxf7KAucJ-gCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-09%2Bat%2B11.47.08%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-GBf2Z5KEHmY/WMGHKQi0UaI/AAAAAAAAG1g/3c-13DA9FNkUEoJ26nSZ7nqxf7KAucJ-gCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-09%2Bat%2B11.47.08%2BAM.png" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">From two data points on a chart (typically one is a high and, the other, a comparable low) calculate the change in time and square it, calculate the change in price and square it and take the square root of the two after having added them.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Simple, right...except for "squaring." That thing that WD Gann told us we needed to do to our chart paper and Brad Cowan says we need to read what WD Gann said about squaring. From my studies, Pythagoras' formulation works only as long as both time and price have the ability to influence the value. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">To accomodate squaring I have two rules. First I use natural units. I use hours, days, weeks, months. Of course the price side is simple to use the decimal to "balance" time and price. Second, that "balance" word itself. Over a long period of market time, time and price need to balance... Neither should become the primary determinant in the Pythagorean calculation. As well, I try to keep the ultimate output of the formula (the PTV value) to 3 digits by, whatever the price and time metric, reducing them by 10 to make the PTV value, ideally, 3 digits. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">The final comment on squaring; I cheat. Brad Cowan used a weekly calculation per dollar up to the late 1980's and thereafter, trading hours to the dollar. I go one step further and reduce trading hours by 10 and dollars by 10 to make the value a 3 or 4-digit number. The ultimate output of the Pythagorean formula is the same in either case differing by only one decimal.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Calculate the PTV value of the vector from the 2000 DJIA high versus the 2002 DJIA market bottom:</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/--fMDnnR93lc/WMGkvakLqPI/AAAAAAAAG2A/vdiLgRE8yOQEghV4Fnp1yg_Ec_9OcWhEwCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-09%2Bat%2B1.53.22%2BPM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="100" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/--fMDnnR93lc/WMGkvakLqPI/AAAAAAAAG2A/vdiLgRE8yOQEghV4Fnp1yg_Ec_9OcWhEwCLcB/s400/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-09%2Bat%2B1.53.22%2BPM.png" width="400" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">That's how its computed and, again, the squaring is trading days X 6.5 hours per day / 10 and price change in dollars /10. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">***</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">So what if we find all the above numbers in the DJIA from 2000 to present? Gosh, we find Phi everyday. There are resistance and support levels that we see hit all the time. A big "so what?"</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Its the structure. If follows the structure of a Platonic solid. Bradley Cowan indicates in Appendix G (hmm, does G stand for Gann) of Four D that the important growth spiral in DJIA is root five and, therefore, the Platonic solid would be the adjacent cubes. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">We find Phi all the time but can we predict every instance in which we are going to find it; exactly which day, exactly which price level in reaction to a previous price level? Nope. I defy anyone to assert the inerrant and predictable Phi structure. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">I'd say Brad's left something tucked away with only the remotest of hints. I recall the first time I'd read anything about Bradley Cowan; it was in an interview in which he made the comment that every angle in the market is 60*. Ultimately I came to understand we as observers see the 60* angeles differently because the market twists relative to our field of vision. If you look face-on at a 10" X 10" piece of paper it looks square. If we lay it on a table and look at it with our eyes level to the table, we see only the edge of the paper. If its square to our vision, its a 10" long line without any height. What we perceive about the third dimension, what we see, lies to us. If our vision is subjective in the third dimension based on the location of the observer, how can it be otherwise in the fourth dimension?</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">That 60* hint; its the equilateral triangle in the second dimension and the tetrahedron in the third dimension. The triangle and the tetrahedron is the most efficient of the Platonic solids in many regards. In two dimensions, the triangle forms a solid structure with only 3 sides. In two dimension, the four-sided square is not a solid structure until you add a diagonal to firm it up (which creates 2 triangles by the way). Ditto those observations for the tetrahedron versus the cube. Nature's smallest firm structure; the triangle and tetrahedron.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">And what are the fewest number of tetrahedra that can be arranged to comprise a cube? There is one and only one decomposition of a cube into five tetrahedra, the smallest number. And there are twelve methods of decomposing the cube into six tetrahedra. At least, that's what I read <i><a href="http://www.baumanneduard.ch/Splitting%20a%20cube%20in%20tetrahedras2.htm" target="_blank">HERE</a></i>. Twelve and one.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Another "so what." Perhaps the cubic structure of spacetime is most evident in the cube, but the cube is comprised of either 5 or 6 tetrahedra. One edge of a tetrahedra appearing on the face of the cube, perhaps two edges of each tetrahedra, forced into the cube provide the market's etching of its history on each cube.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">What I believe we will see in the next essay is the PTV of the market creates minimal elements of the sides and edges on <i>sequential</i> faces of the two adjacent cubes. The math confirms this as I hope I can demonstrate.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">I expect the tetrahedron to be the basest structure of spacetime, five or six of which coalesce to form the cube. But for now, we need to go about proving the structure in the market itself. That will begin in the next essay related to which I've already identified most of the metrics presented above in a progression that demonstrates the higher level of structure, the cube.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">In my current thinking, this is only a very early experiment in spacetime. Ultimately, Mr. Gann was able to use the unique vibration of each person, place, thing (according to Luo Clement, aka WD Gann) to describe and predict its unique future according to the structure of time. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Jim Ross</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><div><br /></div></div>Jimhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14728986969466359235noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6256940740610422497.post-217230502291151372017-03-08T12:31:00.000-08:002017-03-09T04:56:23.183-08:00Current Market: Symmetry of the post 2009 bottom marketMy studies of WD Gann's "The Tunnel Thru the Air" proved to me that Mr. Gann could identify future events. So many of the events that are coded into The Tunnel are things that have come true or will come true. For example, most researchers accept Mr. Gann predicted in 1927 the July 1932 bottom to within days/hours. In my research I identified many, if not dozens, of events that have occurred.<br /><div><br /></div><div>And I was misled about events in our future. Oh, not the nature of the events (the "what")...but the time (the "when"). As I step back from The Tunnel I know the "what" that will occur. Everyone does. Read today's news about the USGS declaring Los Angeles overdue for an earthquake. Of course, the same is true of the Cascadia subduction and a San Francisco event. We all know the "what." How many people, even on the Pacific Coast, believe there will not be a great event? Few I expect. They're simply banking on it not occurring during their lifetime. We all know the "what. How often did Mr. Gann echo Mathew 16:3? </div><div><br /></div><div>The problem is the "when." I imagined the "when" based on subjective clues I thought I saw in The Tunnel. That's the big problem. You can paint a scenario of the "what" with subjective language imagery; even if it is encoded. Mr. Gann actually used the "Tao device," a mathematic spacing of acrostic/telestic words spaced a meaningful number of lines between the words, to confirm to us the "what." <a href="http://markettimeandpricetownhall.blogspot.com/2016/01/continuing-on-with-tao-encoding-device.html" target="_blank">Tao to WAR</a>, equally spaced lines between the words Tao to WAR. Meaningful mathematic spacing of "<a href="http://markettimeandpricetownhall.blogspot.com/2016/09/finding-yhwh-and-isaiah-910-third.html" target="_blank">San Andreas</a>" and a key phrase, "<a href="http://markettimeandpricetownhall.blogspot.com/2016/01/tip-hat-san-andreas-perhaps-proof-of.html" target="_blank">Tip the hat</a>," in that 2015 movie. And that mathematic "Tao device" was appended to the date <a href="http://markettimeandpricetownhall.blogspot.com/2015/09/wd-gann-predicted-and-commemorated.html" target="_blank">September 11, 2001</a> and the number of deaths that day; Mr. Gann predicted 9/11 and the movie that would lead me to discover the WD Gann map of time. Yes, he could determine the "when." Too many instances of subjective language supported by incredible mathematic symmetry encoded into The Tunnel to dismiss.</div><div><br /></div><div>He knew the "when." The most "in your face" example is the 286 trades in 25 days with only 22 transactions that lost money. Is that statistically possible if the market.... and spacetime .... is a random walk? Can any person do that without a computer and an observer stalking his every step on the floor of the NYSE? </div><div><br /></div><div>Mr. Gann often said, time is the most important factor. Was he going to give away the "when" as easily as he gave away the "what" that we all have anyhow? "When" is the perfectly accurate mathematic solution. Having spent much of the last several months reworking my understanding of the mathematics which I believe is inherent in Mr. Gann's methods, I can see the signs of spacetime structure. Again, we all can. We see price and time reacting to Phi intervals. If you look deeper you find sqrt(2), sqrt(5), pi, sqrt(3) and their roots and squares are in the market. They are all hallmarks of two and three dimensional structure of structure if you study planar geometry and the geometry of Platonic solids. What's missing is the integration of time with space. Sir Arthur Eddington offered time as the fourth dimension. If we didn't have our second eye we wouldn't "see" depth or the third dimension. As Edington further offered, what if we had a third eye in our forehead, would we be able to to "see" the fourth dimension?</div><div><br /></div><div>But we don't. We can only intuit the existence of the fourth dimension. One such feeling is when we see in our three dimensional realm things that fly in the face of randomness...when we see spacetime creating symmetry. Symmetry, the arch enemy of randomness.</div><div><br /></div><div>So what symmetry might we see in the stock market today? </div><div><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-hqaRzxoSiFM/WMBiiFHmmjI/AAAAAAAAG0I/GhvgPxbOuq4Lv5Nq-HLd1YLcVrWU7hqkwCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-08%2Bat%2B2.58.35%2BPM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="183" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-hqaRzxoSiFM/WMBiiFHmmjI/AAAAAAAAG0I/GhvgPxbOuq4Lv5Nq-HLd1YLcVrWU7hqkwCLcB/s400/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-03-08%2Bat%2B2.58.35%2BPM.png" width="400" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Price hugs the red ellipse for more than a year before diverging to rendezvous with the exact center of the ellipse. And then price reaches the bottom of the ellipse for the last year of the prospective red ellipse' life. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Now subdivide the red ellipse such that the purple ellipse A is inscribed in the left half of the larger red ellipse. Price hugs the upper portion of that ellipse in its half life. Clone smaller purple ellipse A and call it purple ellipse B. Append ellipse B' left most point to the right endpoint of ellipse A and with only a little wiggling the end of ellipse B coincides with the right end point of red ellipse A.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">But creating the ellipses is now what's intriguing. Its price within the limits of the three ellipses. Its confined if not conforming.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">As if to put an exclamation point on the analysis, does not the midpoint of the red ellipse A occur at the price level of the top of the 2007 market? That's indicated by the blue horizontal line. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">***</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">That's the visual, the subjective approach to intuiting the structure of spacetime....or, at least, in the market. There is a mathematic level and I am beginning to see how the things we see occurring, the Phi's, the sqrt 2s, 3s and 5s. I'm actually seeing more than just support and resistance popping in and out of the market at indiscernible intervals. There is structure and the structure will predict the outcome. The future outcome. And its not just in the market. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Its the solution to whether the Dow topped last week. The solution to "when" the Hoover Dam will fall, "when" San Franciso and Los Angeles will be afflicted, "when" the Cascadia subduction will flood the Northwest.... </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">I don't have that mathematic structure and solution yet. But I believe the math exists and there are a very few people who have components of that knowledge. Certainly, not this duller knife in the drawer. Not yet.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Jim Ross</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div>Jimhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14728986969466359235noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6256940740610422497.post-27554848136155636202017-02-10T13:11:00.001-08:002017-02-10T13:56:08.594-08:00Proving the structure and nature of space and timeMany times I've floated the thought that the stock market was WD Gann's laboratory for the study of time and space. Consider the often cited quotations:<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-fAu9EQkPEpo/WJ3TqtvbOLI/AAAAAAAAGxo/qJJTt8kwC4Unjo7wNEfMdx97kBEQEuGfACLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-02-10%2Bat%2B9.51.38%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="126" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-fAu9EQkPEpo/WJ3TqtvbOLI/AAAAAAAAGxo/qJJTt8kwC4Unjo7wNEfMdx97kBEQEuGfACLcB/s400/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-02-10%2Bat%2B9.51.38%2BAM.png" width="400" /></a></div><br />Fourth dimension; we might presume, as did Sir Arthur Eddington in his first translation and explanation of Einstein's works, that time is the "fourth dimension." And that natural laws and principles of math and its dependent brother, geometry, rule all four dimensions..... that all things are mathematic, not just in the three dimensions we can see and feel, but in that dynamically related fourth dimension of time we can intuit. <br /><br />How else would it be possible to predict the future, if that is indeed possible, if all things are random and related only by will and effort? How could the claim be made that "<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><i>The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun." [Eccl 1:9] </i>if not that all is predetermined? </span></span><br /><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">He proved it. Use your informed statistical intuition to satisfy yourself. Per "The Ticker Interview" 286 trades in 25 trading days with only 22 losses witnessed by an independent party. I've written </span><i style="font-family: inherit;"><a href="http://markettimeandpricetownhall.blogspot.com/2016/06/about-those-22-losses-in-ticker.html" target="_blank">essays on the vastly unlikely possibility</a></i><span style="font-family: inherit;"> of such an occurrence. If the market is a 'random walk,' can anyone undertake 286 trades and incur only 22 losses? I've even offered the <a href="http://markettimeandpricetownhall.blogspot.com/2016/06/adding-color-to-mr-ganns-22-losses-in.html" target="_blank"><i>22 losses were purposefully taken</i></a> for to demonstrate some properties of mathematics. Either Richard D Wyckoff and his independent party viewing the 286 trades was in on "the fix" or....Mr. Gann could "do it."</span></span><br /><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">The market was just the simplest case in which experiments were easily undertaken and one that is subject to the undeniable proof of mathematics. It was Mr. Gann's laboratory. There is only time and money, both things that can be easily described in mathematic terms. Its not like viewing the future of a person who we have difficulty reducing to mathematics (although Luo Clement, err, WD Gann did) of judging whether the results support the predicted result. The market was the simple case from which to conflate larger and more elaborate definitions of natural law in other venues.</span></span><br /><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">So if its so simple, why can't we see it in the market? You wouldn't be reading this essay if you had not seen the tracks of natural law in the market. You see Phi, cyclic periods, waves... But they don't occur with discernible mathematic regularity. Well, I think they do but its far too elaborate for us to place in a methodology that does more than bend the curve slightly in favor of the trader (resistance levels, Elliot Waves, etc). Math is perfect, not a bending. Today's trader, speaking only of the probability of a successful trade as opposed to "money management," is far from the perfection of mathematics.</span></span><br /><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">At least, can we see rudimentary evidence of natural law in Mr. Gann's laboratory? I think so. Let's do it visually first and from that, then see some math. Recall for a moment the first two rows of the tetractys and images that we see in WD Gann's "The Magic Word:"</span></span><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ex2w9PhGLV4/WJ4Da_IDpBI/AAAAAAAAGyw/PGfXaJ-wDyAJdeMzbd0NxNVPoo39oLnMwCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-02-10%2Bat%2B1.15.39%2BPM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="123" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ex2w9PhGLV4/WJ4Da_IDpBI/AAAAAAAAGyw/PGfXaJ-wDyAJdeMzbd0NxNVPoo39oLnMwCLcB/s320/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-02-10%2Bat%2B1.15.39%2BPM.png" width="320" /></a></div><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">[Interesting, the third triangle above has 22 letters in it just as Mr. Gann took 22 losses in the 286 trades. It always bothered me that the sixth row had 7 letters instead of 6. Did he have to fudge it? Nah....]</span></span><br /><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Reflect on the nature of the triangle. The fewest number of lines (3) which, when connected, define a stable two-dimensional structure. The square, even with four lines, is unstable unless you add a fifth diagonal. And when you add the fifth diagonal line, well, you have two triangles to comprise the square. Richard Buckminster "Bucky" Fuller, architect, author, mathematician spent a lifetime developing his theories of natural law based upon the smallest component, the triangle and tetrahedron.</span></span><br /><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">The simplicity and strength of the triangle is a similar property of the tetrahedron relative to other Platonic and Archimedean solids. Nature's smallest and strongest of two-dimensional structures found to be the smallest and strongest of three dimensional structures. Nature filling space with the fewest vectors arranged in the strongest manner.</span></span><br /><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><i><b>What would be more logical than to extrapolate nature's triangle to the fourth dimension?</b></i></span></span><br /><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Consider the 1921 to 1937 Dow Jones Industrial Average and the supposed fourth dimension:</span></span><br /><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-D2jVJ2qtMjY/WJ3oSr4a2HI/AAAAAAAAGyI/OD81NifzR0caDAlBme6RVsJ1Uaf8qyxXQCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-02-10%2Bat%2B11.19.47%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="185" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-D2jVJ2qtMjY/WJ3oSr4a2HI/AAAAAAAAGyI/OD81NifzR0caDAlBme6RVsJ1Uaf8qyxXQCLcB/s400/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-02-10%2Bat%2B11.19.47%2BAM.png" width="400" /></a></div><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span>The two triangles (ABC and BCD) comprising the above quadrilateral is, apparently, a rotated tetrahedron. Each component triangle is, similar to the first two rows of the tetracty, subdivided into 4 component and equal triangles.<br /><br />A nice thought to entertain; we unite space and time symbolized in the three dimensional tetrahedron by rotating the three dimensional tetrahedron. Don't, for a moment, think I think this is new. Many far smarter people than myself have proposed the fourth dimension is the addition of 'motion' to the third dimension.<br /><br />Is there math <i>coincidence</i> to support the idea that future point "D" above can be predicted from past points A, B and C (the capital letters)? Connect the medials (small letters a, b, c, d, e) of the five visible edges of the tetrahedron to form two inscribed triangles abc and cde. Are there <i>coincidental</i> mathematic relations between them? Yes. But there is value in the observation that the outer perimeters are twice their medial subdivided triangles. Its a law in two-dimensional geometry I concede. <i>But the mathematic measurement tool is one that uses both space and time measurements as will be explained in the next paragraph. That observation is not insignificant. Think about it.</i><br /><br />The math tool necessary to measure space and time vectors is that of Pythagoras' 345 triangle as implemented in Bradley Cowan's "Price Time Vector" or PTV. [Yes, I know the Cowan / Baumring controversy, but the former published the PTV and copyrighted it regardless.] Simply, the square root of the sum of time squared plus price squared. I've used Cycletimer software and the numbers are approximate because you visually fit the beginning and end of a PTV. <br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-YEopslc3edY/WJ31gGBLd9I/AAAAAAAAGyc/KCtS1nTKWKYzN9xTJ0yuo2y6uai74qYVgCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-02-10%2Bat%2B12.15.59%2BPM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="187" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-YEopslc3edY/WJ31gGBLd9I/AAAAAAAAGyc/KCtS1nTKWKYzN9xTJ0yuo2y6uai74qYVgCLcB/s400/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-02-10%2Bat%2B12.15.59%2BPM.png" width="400" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">I have not counted the many amazing properties of the above vector value relationships. Start with the perimeter of medial triangle abc (738.2) is half the perimeter of the larger ABC triangle in which it is inscribed (1469.2). The perimeter of cde is half the perimeter of the larger BCD in which it is inscribed. Well, that's mathematics...subdividing any triangle at the medials of its three edges will produce that proportion of one half. So, the more important challenge is to find out if there are relations between the triangles on the left (ABC and abc) and the ones on the right (BCD and cde).</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">A first observation.... vector ab at 189 which is substantially the value of vector de at 183 (allowing for visual charting inaccuracy on my part). Vector cd at 147.76 is roughly one half of the value of vector ac at 289.32 and side CD at 285.01. Perhaps that's the doubling and halving of which Mr. Gann often spoke. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Let's get a little more personal. Try vector bc at 261.06 versus vector ce at 212.17 or a ratio of 1.51. That would be 1.50 if vector ce were 213. Now divide 261.06 by the root of 2 (the diagonal of Pythagoras 1X1 square) and you get 184.6. That's frighteningly close to the vector values of ab and de. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Try just one more. This last item makes it most apparent to me the structure of the fourth dimension is the tetrahedron in motion; vector AC of the left triangle is substantially double the vector value of vector CD of the right triangle. I've reduced this last observation to a spreadsheet; AC is 567.8 and CD is 288.89 based upon the extreme values as opposed to closing prices. Very close to double.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">I venture to say every point and vector from 1921 to 1937 are mathematically interrelated. Space and time are not causally separate; movement in one determines compensating movement in the other. And every point in the future...or in the past...can be derived. Determined.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-pL0zBH98euI/WJ4eXQMr7mI/AAAAAAAAGzY/ZPol_B14a8w3G5DjOjG9PRGoGQ9dzJBiQCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-02-10%2Bat%2B3.10.39%2BPM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="126" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-pL0zBH98euI/WJ4eXQMr7mI/AAAAAAAAGzY/ZPol_B14a8w3G5DjOjG9PRGoGQ9dzJBiQCLcB/s400/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-02-10%2Bat%2B3.10.39%2BPM.png" width="400" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">The Dow from 1921 to 1937 is the easy case, visually and mathematically compelling...at least to me. The 1929 to 1942 period is equally or more compelling in even simpler and vastly more perfected math. It would seem the relationships and dependencies that might be derived from these simple cases can be applied to the more complicated time periods. Can point D of the future be derived from points A, B and C of the past? Can we prove the structure and nature of space and time in the Dow?</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Back to the laboratory.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"> </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Jim Ross</div><br /><i>Note:</i> A tetrahedron is often described as a three-sided pyramid. Medial points a, b, c, d and e appear as if an inscribed four-sided pyramid. And if you connect the medial of the sixth edge (vector AD which cannot be seen but we know must be there) to the four perimeter edges then you have two component four-sided pyramids. This after having recently read Peter Tompkins book on the Great Pyramid of Giza. One of the pyramids Robert Gordon did not destroy because he believed they were placed on earth for a divine purpose.<br /><br /><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span><br /><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span>Jimhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14728986969466359235noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6256940740610422497.post-15982511972374209882017-01-11T09:50:00.000-08:002017-01-11T09:50:13.088-08:00Seeking the "When;" back to basic research and a small finding of Phi in WD Gann's "Map of Time" structureHaving failed to read "clues" in WD Gann's "The Tunnel Thru the Air" to discern the "when" his many encoded scenarios will occur, I'm back to basic research. Simply, I tried to guess at the time-frame for the vivid imagery of those encoded messages were indicating. Oh, I don't believe it was a complete failure. Learning comes from failure. The many messages are what we otherwise know will occur, just not when. We know the instability of Earth's tectonic plates, particularly at the California faults. It will be, and it will occur, just as it has in the past. How many times and in how many of his writings did Mr. Gann quote the many Bible versus asserting the repetition of history. <br /><br />We just don't know the "when."<br /><br />Similar to my recent episode of imagination, physical scientists variously and generally claim with 70% or so confidence a 7.0 event will strike the Pacific Coast within 30 years; bold prediction. One has claimed a great event would strike Los Angeles within the 2-year time frame (NASA in 2014), a claim now beyond its expiration date. I believe there is purpose in these failures and in the many disaster movies we see; its general awareness. They are warnings. Everywhere you live there is danger, but some places are simply more dangerous. We know its going to happen in California and it will be bad. Just, when?<br /><br />So I can't read the clues. Clues are a possible conveyance of imagined knowledge; sometimes right, sometimes wrong (my definition of clues). As Mr. Gann ruminated about language being subjective and that mathematics is the only science the world has agreed upon, clues are inferior even to subjective language. A verbal or written statement, language, between two persons, no matter how plain, can be misinterpreted. A clue, well, that's a vastly more subjective concept than language. <br /><br />Math is the only universally recognizable arbiter of truth. I've documented enough proof of Mr. Gann's ability to see the future in great detail that I can only believe in his having identified the mathematic and deterministic structure of space and time; of spacetime. If we are to know the "when," then it can only be found through the math or, perhaps, a detective better able than I, to weigh the clues.<br /><br />Obviously, I don't have the math dialed in. So its back to basic research. I re read "The Tunnel" and "The Magic Word" and am now concentrating on a person I believe to be the most important in WD Gann's mathematics, John Dee.<br /><br />John Dee, acrostically and telestically encoded into "The Tunnel" 44 times as "dee," is clearly an important figure in Mr. Gann's view of the world. John Dee, Renaissance mathematician, astronomer, alchemist and patron of Queen Elizabeth I's court. Lecturer at Cambridge on Euclid's "Elements" and, notably, tutor and mentor to Lord Francis Bacon, Dee advised monarchs and colleagues alike. Not that 44 instances of his name supposedly encoded in "The Tunnel" proves anything. After all, the word "dee" is comprised of the most popular letters in the alphabet...we'd expect to find acrostic and telestic occurrences in any random text. But we'd expect <u>both</u> acrostic and telestic occurrences. Not so, there are only telestic occurrences in "The Tunnel;" there aren't any acrostic occurrences. And what do we find in the middle of those 44 occurrences and smack in the middle of the book? We find the telestic occurrence of "<u>007</u>." "007" was the code name for John Dee with his chief patron, Queen Elizabeth I in their encoded correspondence. 44 occurrences of "dee" and 1 of his secret name, "007." That makes <u>45</u>; a number very important to Mr. Gann. Coincidences?<br /><br />So again, I'm back to basic research of a most important figure, John Dee and, by extension of his work declaring the Monas Hieroglyphica (presented to Maximillian), two more contemporary mathematicians; Robert Marshall on number theory and Richard Buckminster Fuller on geometry and Platonic/Archimedian "solid" structures. Just basic research with WD Gann's "Map of Time" never far from my thoughts. John Dee's "philosopher stone number," namely the number 252, and Bucky Fuller's basic atomic elemental structure allegedly comprising all of nature, the cuboctehedron (the vector equilibrium) at the 5th level. Hmmm, at the <u>5</u><i><b>th</b></i> level that's a structure comprised of 252 spheres or tetrahedrons (Euler's formula being (10 X <i><b><u>5</u></b></i>^2) + 2 -252). <br /><br />Interesting.... the "Map of Time" as comprised represents two periods of 84 years or 168 years and if we add another 84 years we have 252. 252, one-tenth the Biblical "Great Year." If we break down the Biblical Great Year into six units of <u>42</u> years, we have the <i><b><u>2</u></b></i>nd level of the cuboctehedron (10 X <b><i><u>2</u></i></b>^2 = <u>42</u>). <br /><br />Hmmm, wasn't WD Gann born 252 years after the death of Lord Francis Bacon? Some numbers just seem to be mysteriously popular.<br /><br />About that WD Gann "Map of Time." I've found and documented several proofs of its mathematic integrity in previous essays. As admitted, I don't know how to use the Map. Still, the Map was created by WD Gann for some purpose. It was both consciously intended and, as I've derived it, is substantially accurate. Add the following notation to previously documentation:<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ZgWirZ0eAxA/WHZOVRclJaI/AAAAAAAAGwQ/VSlFqUE-ku4vm6cQ5V3O2w5Ug-RYzd5wgCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-01-11%2Bat%2B10.24.22%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="92" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ZgWirZ0eAxA/WHZOVRclJaI/AAAAAAAAGwQ/VSlFqUE-ku4vm6cQ5V3O2w5Ug-RYzd5wgCLcB/s400/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-01-11%2Bat%2B10.24.22%2BAM.png" width="400" /></a></div><br />The number of lines in "The Tunnel" according to the "Map of Time" divided by the number of days the novel spanned equals the widely recognized symbol of Phi, 1.60, to the third decimal. Coincidence? I take it as just another confirmation that I counted and detailed the number of lines in "The Tunnel" correctly. <br /><br />So, yet again, I'm back at it. Not with clues and an imagined story derived from clues (not yet at least), but basic research that seeks to find bits and pieces of mathematic truth left behind by an amazing man. Perhaps someday, the math might be derived to provide the "when."<br /><br />Jim RossJimhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14728986969466359235noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6256940740610422497.post-20788441634757293602016-10-18T08:04:00.001-07:002016-10-18T08:04:56.971-07:00The "San Andreas" timelineI viewed the movie "San Andreas" yet again yesterday to get a handle on some times that appear on cell phones and wall clocks during the movie. There are very few. To my surprise, the duration of the movie was 3 days beginning at just after noon the first day and ending at 7:35pm PDT the third day. You might recall the movie "Knowing" was exactly 7 days. <br /><br />If events I have interpreted as being predicted by WD Gann in "The Tunnel Thru the Air" are to occur according to the timeline of events of the movie "San Andreas" then following would be that timeline:<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-HmIlT_bq93Q/WAY4D1tixfI/AAAAAAAAGvg/VML9FmLF2qAIGdMPpBZnWs-BFzkrTGx5wCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-18%2Bat%2B10.52.54%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="237" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-HmIlT_bq93Q/WAY4D1tixfI/AAAAAAAAGvg/VML9FmLF2qAIGdMPpBZnWs-BFzkrTGx5wCLcB/s400/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-18%2Bat%2B10.52.54%2BAM.png" width="400" /></a></div><br />The first event, the destruction of the Hoover Dam, would occur today at lunchtime, just before 12:30pm EDT on the East Coast. That is 1.5 hours from now or 90 minutes. Those in LA and SF would have 28 hours from the moment of the Hoover Dam's collapse to be clear of the Pacific coastline.<br /><br />Nothing we give me greater pleasure than to be wrong in my interpretation but the vast likelihood of being wrong will not prevent me of providing the information I've derived.<br /><br />Jim RossJimhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14728986969466359235noreply@blogger.com9tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6256940740610422497.post-33435505182312342442016-10-17T04:27:00.003-07:002016-10-17T05:47:03.907-07:00A 2016 miracle created in 1927?84 years since the last year in WD Gann's "The Tunnel Thru the Air." And on page 84:<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-99QpkQfxa3g/WASowYGa1vI/AAAAAAAAGvQ/zC10-rjb11MB5PCjPT5Vz9UI57wnj3P6ACLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-17%2Bat%2B6.31.37%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="161" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-99QpkQfxa3g/WASowYGa1vI/AAAAAAAAGvQ/zC10-rjb11MB5PCjPT5Vz9UI57wnj3P6ACLcB/s320/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-17%2Bat%2B6.31.37%2BAM.png" width="320" /></a></div><br />We count the days and nights to denominate the 'signs,' 'seasons,' 'days,' and 'years.' We can predict when its best to plant, harvest, to prepare for winter... Unfortunately, we haven't progressed to the point where we can predict much more than that have we?<br /><br />I'm ever haunted by those three pages 82, 83 and 84. Page 82 that warns us of the 'remarkable events' that will occur following the election of the 266th Pope (Pope Francis elected in 2013). Page 83 that burdens the person who understands math and science to warn others of the signs present in the mathematics. And page 84 that laments how few will study the Bible "...to understand the signs, discern the future and profit by it." How many times have I written of those three pages?<br /><br />People of math and science and vastly of the 'randomite' persuasion will look at the miracle of the 25 days of trading record of WD Gann and dismiss it as a fraud. They cannot do otherwise. According to randomness a person cannot take 286 trades in 25 days and incur only 22 losses no matter how expert they might be. The world is random. Absent inside information, there can be no more than a marginal trading advantage to behavioral, sociological methods of trading the markets. And certainly, there can be no edge to any occult methodology or system of numbers. Systems are deterministic where the world is, in their view, random. Boil it down, the randomite is forced to claim the "independent observer" of the 286 trades was part of the fraud of the "286 trades in 25 days" for otherwise his view of the world is wrong.<br /><br />Faced with the propositions that the days leading to an <i><a href="http://screencast.com/t/DrM9WNFH" target="_blank">October 19 disaster in San Francisco would follow the timeline of the movie "Knowing," the movie "San Andreas" or be proven entirely imagined</a></i>, I elected to take a whopping $800 short position in QQQs on Friday October 14. My logic was, following the first of the three alternatives, the major indexes would each be greatly affected by the destruction of the Hoover Dam on October 15 according to the first alternative. Of course, that did not occur leaving the final two alternatives.<br /><br />If the San Andreas scenario were to occur, then it would commence mid-day (Pacific Coast Time) on October 18 and the Los Angeles and San Francisco events would occur, in that order, beginning at 2:13pm PST on October 19. That would be after markets close on October 19.<br /><br />So what miracle, conceived in 1927, might occur in 2016? People believe in the objective truth of numbers. Absent the ability to claim fraud, the randomites would be forced by their own god of statistics that the world is ordered; it is not a 'random walk.' What if a great real time trade defying explanation might occur in 2016 based on clues in a 1927 novel? After all, Mr. Gann claimed (<i><a href="http://screencast.com/t/DrM9WNFH" target="_blank">notably on page 77</a></i>) its as easy to predict the future 100 or 1000 years in advance as it is one or two.<br /><br />I'm game, after all, a grub stake $800 position is not a bunch. I've traded six figure individual trades in options contracts and this is negligible. $.01 per share (ignoring substantial commissions) become<i><a href="http://screencast.com/t/ZgjbMwQCxU5" target="_blank"> 800 put contracts in QQQ 105 September 21</a></i> expiry or 80,000 shares. That's the seed trade anticipating the failed October 15 Hoover Dam event now anticipating the second alternative October 18 Hoover Dam event. <br /><br />If the October 18 event occurs, there's a window and a suspected perfect trade that will occur; a trade indicated in the 1927 novel, The Tunnel, that will present itself in which incredible, no miraculous, returns can be had. I've cited acrostic/telestic name of that trade months ago. If the window presents itself, I will revisit it in the early hours of trading on October 19.<br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;">*** ***</div><div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">Of course, none of the above can happen so I fully expect, according to my understanding of the vast improbability of predicting an October 18 Hoover Dam event, that I will be writing another mea culpa come Thursday. I hope to do so for otherwise there will have occurred great sorrow and hardship and further such tribulation will be forecast. </div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">Here you have it, a real time trade beginning with a whopping $800, which, if correct will have a second transaction. If it works, the randomites haven't anywhere to hide. A trade conceived in 1927 with returns that defy imagination.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">In the alternate, I'm wrong, I hope to be wrong and that's fine with me.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">Jim Ross</div><br /><br />Jimhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14728986969466359235noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6256940740610422497.post-64217160170981248542016-10-16T06:33:00.000-07:002016-10-16T06:33:10.320-07:00The final alternativesThe vastly improbable and disastrous event did not occur on October 15 warning of following events of October 17 and 19.<br /><br />You may have noticed several differences between the written "Remarkable Events" essay that appears in the WD Gann Predictions blog and the YouTube presentation. The written essay was created as a script for the then planned Youtube presentation; an outline. The YouTube presentation contained many more "messages" and information that were not in the written essay. Among the added information was the following:<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-aWsOB0_ODWM/WAN8_yqM5TI/AAAAAAAAGvA/ICR102NJwjsa4XQ1QF4a4IeDWiAcutbZACLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-16%2Bat%2B9.09.46%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="217" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-aWsOB0_ODWM/WAN8_yqM5TI/AAAAAAAAGvA/ICR102NJwjsa4XQ1QF4a4IeDWiAcutbZACLcB/s400/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-16%2Bat%2B9.09.46%2BAM.png" width="400" /></a></div><br />The central point of my work over the last two years has seemed to circle back to the date October 19, 2016. Perhaps a unifying bias that so directs my work to untruth. Perhaps something destined. Certainly a question to be answered in the next four days.<br /><br />The alternate of the slide that appeared in the YouTube presentation shows I favored, that if in the vastly improbable event the feared disasters were to occur, then they would follow the "Knowing" timeline. Alternately they would follow the two-day timeline of "San Andreas." So, I am encouraged that I am wrong but will not be fully relieved until October 20.<br /><br />About the nature of my work with WD Gann's "The Tunnel Thru the Air." It's all about clues that range from the vastly probable to the highly speculative. Vastly probable, the "six e's." The first paragraph of the Foreword contains six lines of supposedly random test all ending with the letter "e." This is vastly improbable and demonstrates the authors notification to the alert and aware reader that the book is encoded with acrostic and telestic letters that may provide information.<br /><br />Now flip to a messy such as the "fifth warning." A page of acrostic and telestic letters, say 72 letters that might be configured to spell words and intelligible, relevant message such as:<br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><b><i>Atlantis Oil and Gas Platform set on fire.</i></b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b><i><br /></i></b></div><div style="text-align: left;">It could be re-interpreted to give you:</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: center;"><i><b>Alberta set on fire - oil and gas sands.</b></i></div><div style="text-align: center;"><i><b><br /></b></i></div><div style="text-align: left;">The statistics of the six e's are vastly improbable making it conclusive that the author wanted to pass along a message. Conversely, if you studied the 72 letters that might be used to create the two messages above in an imperfect subset of those letters, well, you can create many messages. The statistics do not support any level of certainty of the prediction.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">It all boils down to clues. I do not have what I believe Mr. Gann had; a mathematic method of discerning the curve of time and how all things fit into that curve of time. Something he said he derived from his study of the Bible. What I have is just clues which, as the subjectivity of spoken and written language toes, are very imperfect.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: center;">*** ***</div><div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">Two alternatives remain. First, the timeline follows "San Andreas" and the three great geologic events occur rapidly beginning the afternoon of October 18 ending the afternoon of October 19. Second, I'm entirely wrong. The latter being vastly probable by any measure of probability.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">Hopefully, I am wrong.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">Thank you for your interest,</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">Jim Ross</div>Jimhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14728986969466359235noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6256940740610422497.post-49360475511816523852016-10-15T07:53:00.001-07:002016-10-15T08:01:59.878-07:00The fifth warning - October 15, 2016I didn't see a thing about a fire on the Atlantis Oil and Gas Platform. I was relieved and, of course, embarrassed at my apparent wrongful interpretation of WD Gann's encoded work in "The Tunnel Through the Air." <br /><br />As background, The Tunnel identifies the 2009 fictional movie "Knowing" in his 1927 novel, including the author, certain characters, locations and events. The movie, in turn, identifies dates of disasters, three of which were then yet to occur. As a warning before the first event there was a minor Gulf of Mexico oil platform fire that was prominently seen at 12 midnight the last minute of October 14 and the first minute of October 15. That is <i><b>Eastern Standard Time.</b></i><br /><br />I reasoned that, if the progression of tragedies I have identified follows the timeline of "Knowing" were followed, we would see a publication of a news item concerning a Gulf of Mexico oil platform. Further detailing the event I found in The Tunnel the messages on the numerically important pages 29 and 58 the following messages:<br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://screencast.com/t/420aVSNYzS5i" target="_blank">Oil leak in sea - Deepwater <i>page 29</i></a></div><div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://screencast.com/t/o9FVl452n" target="_blank">Deepwater Atlantis Oil and Gas set on fire <i>page 58</i></a></div><div style="text-align: center;"><i><br /></i></div><div style="text-align: left;">The first message identifies the date the Deepwater Horizon exploded and created the greatest oil spill in history, April 20, 2010. The second message identified the Deepwater Atlantis and the date of its commissioning. The importance of the messages is the first creates an, arguably, valid prediction of an event and the, again arguable, validity of the second. </div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">The question becomes, did a news report of the Deepwater Atlantis fire occur on at midnight <i><b>Eastern Standard Time?</b></i></div><div style="text-align: left;"><i><b><br /></b></i></div><div style="text-align: left;">I was relieved when I saw nothing on broadcast news. And then I Googled "Atlantis - oil - fire" and searched of only the last 24 hours. I found the following at exactly <i><b>9:59am Eastern Standard Time:</b></i></div><div style="text-align: left;"><i><b><br /></b></i></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-GZ7sLb2thWQ/WAI5ksOqGxI/AAAAAAAAGuU/xe43uK0RCsgx5Abm0cO3wddIQ65FUNcLwCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-15%2Bat%2B9.59.01%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="129" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-GZ7sLb2thWQ/WAI5ksOqGxI/AAAAAAAAGuU/xe43uK0RCsgx5Abm0cO3wddIQ65FUNcLwCLcB/s320/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-15%2Bat%2B9.59.01%2BAM.png" width="320" /></a></div><div style="text-align: left;"><i><b><br /></b></i></div><div style="text-align: left;">The third item on the list is a news article on the Atlantis Oil and Gas Platform (Gulf of Mexico) fire. It was published 6 hours earlier which would make the publication time 3:59am Eastern Standard Time and 11:59pm or midnight Pacific Coast Time. [I have not tried to adjust for 1 hour Daylight Standard Time.] Here is the article that appears in </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Z2RQWxW5GF4/WAI9OAWJzYI/AAAAAAAAGug/p2JSMHiKkkINFtlGjLF7KgGxDEjYegUNACEw/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-15%2Bat%2B10.18.06%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="269" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Z2RQWxW5GF4/WAI9OAWJzYI/AAAAAAAAGug/p2JSMHiKkkINFtlGjLF7KgGxDEjYegUNACEw/s320/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-15%2Bat%2B10.18.06%2BAM.png" width="320" /></a></div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">The "feature" article is about Alberta's recovery from a wildfire on May 3, 2016 that destroyed 2400 homes in the Fort McMurray area and in the <i><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Fort_McMurray_wildfire" target="_blank">Athabasca oil shale production operations</a></i>.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">I revisit the message appearing on page 58 "Deepwater Atlantis Oil and Gas set on fire" and can find the following:</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: center;"><i><b>Alberta set on fire - oil and gas sands</b></i></div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-TN8oCbOBb4Q/WAI9Ou31TpI/AAAAAAAAGu4/ZU_TdxMX54ws07_R0D5JjnYNuVZjpKocQCEw/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-15%2Bat%2B10.28.23%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="214" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-TN8oCbOBb4Q/WAI9Ou31TpI/AAAAAAAAGu4/ZU_TdxMX54ws07_R0D5JjnYNuVZjpKocQCEw/s320/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-15%2Bat%2B10.28.23%2BAM.png" width="320" /></a></div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><br />I was sure Mr. Gann's prediction of the fifth warning had not occurred. I was prepared and pleased to deal with being wrong in my interpretation of his work. The above revision of the message of page 58 and the news article appeared published at midnight PST, well, I'm not sure. Rather, I believe it did occur. I was wrong, but I am not relieved of my concern.<br /><br />I wish I had more time to consider this information, continue to study page 58. But there isn't time. If I lived in the down river path of the Hoover Dam or in LA, San Francisco or San Diego, I would take the precaution of finding some place of safety east of the Colorado River. If in San Francisco and given the time, I'd plan a route that took me north and east of the Hoover Dam and down river crossings may be impaired.<br /><br />If the above interpretation of Mr. Gann's work is true and the fifth warning did occur, the first of three great disasters in the next 5 days will occur at about 3:28pm PST. If wrong yet again as today will prove one way or the other, I will not be fully at ease until October 20.<br /><br />Jim Ross<br /><br />Jimhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14728986969466359235noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6256940740610422497.post-46456653653959860932016-10-13T06:09:00.000-07:002016-10-13T06:09:01.917-07:00Back to page 69; the riddle of 69I hate to deflect from either the climax to the research and interpretation of some aspects WD Gann's "The Tunnel Through the Air" given that it will be proven as either true or false in the next two weeks. Still, I started this blog to keep track of market 'things' that surprised me so I could remember them so I can't help but write about 'things' that intrigue me. <br /><br />These days the 'things' that intrigue me keep me coming back to the same places in The Tunnel. This morning, as I was waking up, I connected some dots on two items that bring me back to the same place, page 69.<br /><br />First, and I've written about this many times, WD Gann was born on June 6, 1878. Since 1878 reduces to (1+8+7+8=6) 6, WD Gann's reduced birth date reflects the notable:<br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><i><b>6 - 6 - 6</b></i></div><div style="text-align: center;"><i><b><br /></b></i></div><div style="text-align: left;">Second, and I've written about this many times, WD Gann's adopted name has similar numerical significance. "Adopted name." Luo Clement, a pen name of WD Gann in my opinion and as I have documented reasons therefore, wrote in "The Ancient Science of Numbers" that a person can change his/her vibration and life's course by changing their name. Hence, Mr. Gann used the name most favorable to him, that being his adoption of his first and middle name as his first name. His name morphed from William Delbert Gann to WD Gann without a middle name. And WD Gann would have three identifiable summations:</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-aaMWkPA2p7U/V_99rQdVbgI/AAAAAAAAGtQ/els12M8-IjULcykEw4qcYTP0NUULEzBawCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-13%2Bat%2B8.26.31%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-aaMWkPA2p7U/V_99rQdVbgI/AAAAAAAAGtQ/els12M8-IjULcykEw4qcYTP0NUULEzBawCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-13%2Bat%2B8.26.31%2BAM.png" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">I do not discount the 'coincidence' of concatenation of the numbers:</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Ky2YgOqsqnM/V_9-Q7uDViI/AAAAAAAAGtU/Ma1GY6gkMBsTbkP8g4ee1DmD7RFcIcF6wCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-13%2Bat%2B8.29.26%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Ky2YgOqsqnM/V_9-Q7uDViI/AAAAAAAAGtU/Ma1GY6gkMBsTbkP8g4ee1DmD7RFcIcF6wCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-13%2Bat%2B8.29.26%2BAM.png" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">And what do we find on page 69 but the riddle of the Book of Jonah, that being the meaning of "3 days and 3 nights." I've often been struck by the simple math of 3 and 3; 3+3=6 and 3X3=9, concatenated 69. And it appears on page 69. I am led back to that page time and again as if the trail and endpoint were designed to emphasize a point.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Is all this coincidence? Maybe Mr. Gann is being the trickster, tricking that poor fool that wakes up 84 years after the last date in The Tunnel worrying about the riddle of 69. Sure, if Mr. Gann had a whimsical and devious sense of humor. What a great practical joke to play on someone. Problem is, in the last two years of research, I can't find an instance of humor on Mr. Gann's part. <i><a href="http://screencast.com/t/UgKIj3vg" target="_blank">Well, one, maybe</a></i>. He doesn't seem to have been anything but serious.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Yeah, I can see someone, other than Mr. Gann, contriving his adopted name to create 9-9-9.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">But how did he create a birth number of 6-6-6? The name number is obviously a mortal contrivance. The birth number is something different. As they say, 'you can't make that stuff up.'</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">And the message, again in my subjective interpretation of acrostic and telestic letters. Look at what it says:</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-5_q0GRVSQMY/V_-ATh3d2tI/AAAAAAAAGtk/gl_XjAuikXUk7ByCXiVA9USxQMHT-v4TgCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-13%2Bat%2B8.38.01%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="236" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-5_q0GRVSQMY/V_-ATh3d2tI/AAAAAAAAGtk/gl_XjAuikXUk7ByCXiVA9USxQMHT-v4TgCLcB/s320/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-13%2Bat%2B8.38.01%2BAM.png" width="320" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><b><i>God asks Jonas to warn men of sin; lead atonement.</i></b></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><b><i><br /></i></b></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Yesterday ended the holiest of Jewish holidays at nightfall, Yom Kippur or the "Day of Atonement," and began the seven-day period of tribulation that began at nightfall in the fictional movie "Knowing." While I have great anxiety over being wrong about my interpretation of Mr. Gann's work, I am vastly more anxious over the prospect of being correct. As is, I am 100% confident of being correct and 100% preferring to be the fool. I will be watching Friday the 14th for the final warning, the Atlantis Oil and Gas Platform fire (expected to be a minor event but the fifth and final warning).</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><i><b>3</b></i> instances of '69' and <i><b>7</b></i> days of tribulation and the curious challenge of WD Gann found in the Foreword to The Tunnel:</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-en6k6FyttAI/V_-GlmP-J6I/AAAAAAAAGt8/i7iR_eqiCoUgUxGTwDG3NyVIALuZpC_PwCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-13%2Bat%2B9.05.01%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="133" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-en6k6FyttAI/V_-GlmP-J6I/AAAAAAAAGt8/i7iR_eqiCoUgUxGTwDG3NyVIALuZpC_PwCLcB/s320/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-13%2Bat%2B9.05.01%2BAM.png" width="320" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">As Mr. Gann did say, "forewarned is forearmed." Be aware of the signs and be safe,</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Jim Ross</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div>Jimhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14728986969466359235noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6256940740610422497.post-9190071407225964452016-10-08T05:51:00.000-07:002016-10-08T06:31:47.254-07:00Yellowstone's dateThere are several acrostic and telestic letter messages regarding the eruption of the Yellowstone Caldera found in WD Gann's "The Tunnel Thru the Air." I have written about them previously and will not go over them here. In fact, I haven't re read them so I hazard to create inconsistencies in my own logic. The point of this blog is to find things and remember them, not to build a case as it may appear. So, I'll just let whatever inconsistencies there are be as they are.<br /><br />I arrived at page 53 yesterday. I note that it is of numerological importance as it is one of the three angles of the Pythagorean triangle; 37, 53 and 90. It is also curiously coincidental that Sadie Gann passed after having lived 53 years. <br /><br />Flashback, how did I get to page 53? Yesterday I was brooding over my inability to move on from the events of 2016, namely the Pacific Coast events of October (Hoover, LA and SF) and December (Portland and Seattle), and towards the 2017 events. I couldn't figure the dates. So, Yellowstone being a very big event predicted to occur in 2017, I decided to watch the 2005 BBC movie "Supervolcano" that, for whatever reason, is effectively in the public domain; it is available in its entire 2 hour presentation <i><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WFaFfdOzPP8" target="_blank">on Youtube</a></i>. <br /><br />The movie is a docu-drama so its accuracy is to be suspected to some extent and, originally released on April 10, 2005, its likely dated. Substantially, I'd guess its a more than accurate enough for my needs...especially since I need some research rest. That<i><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supervolcano_(film)" target="_blank"> "release" date</a></i>, April 10, 2005, that is how I got to page 53. I found that one and only one date in the WD Gann "Map of Time" and focused on that page. Here is what I found:<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-UzSyn_VSJhg/V_jYlre475I/AAAAAAAAGss/WFAjW5mEUuMCyXMwsA0Vqoo6FN-6pNKmQCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-08%2Bat%2B7.14.22%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="273" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-UzSyn_VSJhg/V_jYlre475I/AAAAAAAAGss/WFAjW5mEUuMCyXMwsA0Vqoo6FN-6pNKmQCLcB/s400/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-08%2Bat%2B7.14.22%2BAM.png" width="400" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><i><b>Tell Man that Yellowstone erupts on Easter.</b></i></div><br />You can see on the left, one of the yellow highlighted dates is April 10, 2005, the date on which "Supervolcano" was released. And the message is pretty straightforward.<br /><br />Is the message corroborated? I mean, there are a lot of letters on that page and a lot of them unused. Maybe there is elaboration or maybe an entirely different message or maybe its all imagination.<br /><br />One method of confirmation is to repeat the substance of the message at the "reciprocal" location in the MOT. Look at the line where we find 4/10/2005, it is line 2046. That is the cumulative ascending line number. It is line 2046 out of the 15341 lines of the MOT. The cumulative descending line counterpart is line number 13296 on the right side of that same line and it is mathematically one off from 15341 - 2046 = 13295. That will always be true in the MOT. So I go to line 13294 or thereabouts and find:<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Bzm7DKFi_7Y/V_jg5skpR8I/AAAAAAAAGs8/EelenLc_HTMv_u8-IgBvlUWZfVJDM-E-ACLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-08%2Bat%2B8.03.52%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="218" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Bzm7DKFi_7Y/V_jg5skpR8I/AAAAAAAAGs8/EelenLc_HTMv_u8-IgBvlUWZfVJDM-E-ACLcB/s400/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-08%2Bat%2B8.03.52%2BAM.png" width="400" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><i><b>Yellowstone Caldera.</b></i></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><i><b><br /></b></i></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Confirmation. "Yellowstone Caldera" appears on page 361, but I have also found "Yellowstone" constructed on page 360 as well <i>twice</i> more. This doesn't seem to be a coincidence. There are too many letters in Yellowstone Caldera to be not be missing one. Notice also the page location. Like the number 53, the page numbers 360 and 361 (360 earth degrees in one earth rotation and 361 earth degrees in one solar day) each have immense astrological / chronological meaning.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Now, Yellowstone erupts on Easter. What date is that? Well, we celebrate Christ's rising this year on Sunday, April 16, but that's not necessarily the right day. <i><a href="http://www.johnpratt.com/items/docs/newton.html" target="_blank">Sir Isaac Newton calculated</a></i> two dates for the crucifixion that were acceptable according to Biblical clues, Judean and Julian calendars and astronomic observations and subsequent researchers agreed the Passion occurred on April 3, 0033. That would make Easter April 6. That date is a Thursday in 2017, not a Sunday. Convention needs a Sunday and that would be April 9. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Newton calculated the acceptable date the 17th day of Nisan for the Passion according to the Judean calendar. That date falls on the on Monday April 10. And that date is Erev Pesach, the beginning of Passover. April 9 would be the closest Sunday.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Readers should remember, I am not a qualified student of the Bible capable of any sort of credible opinion on what date Mr. Gann may have been indicating is "the" day Yellowstone will erupt. Lunar phases are a consideration as well and I have my astronomical limitations as well. Of course, volcanos do not do their work in an instant and not in just one day. Whenever in the range of scholarly derived dates in April 2017 that might be, I'd suspect at least three days of primary eruptions. It would seem consistent with the Christian meaning of those days.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">One final thought. "Supervolcano" was released on April 10, 2005. On April 10, 2017, that will be a meaningful 12 years on April 10, 2017.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">All that considered by an expert in nothing, I'll "roll" with April 6 to April 9. Hmmm 6 to 9 or 69. That amazing <a href="http://screencast.com/t/aKc2HqbTfn3a" target="_blank"><i>page 69</i></a>. <i><a href="http://screencast.com/t/LJCybHmtLn9Y" target="_blank">WD Gann's number</a></i>, "6-9."</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Jim Ross</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><br /><br /><br />Jimhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14728986969466359235noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6256940740610422497.post-64941041080164952992016-10-07T10:01:00.000-07:002016-10-07T10:28:27.754-07:00Personal messages 2 - Tunnel thru time 2 of ???In the previous essay the message I found contained two spellings of "God" but needed only one for the message:<br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><i><b>WD Gann sees 33 Ross would read about God's will.</b></i></div><div style="text-align: center;"><i><b><br /></b></i></div><div style="text-align: left;">I did not understand that and I did not understand the painfully obvious "we" spelled at the bottom left of page 332. I do now. The explanation is a continuation of the message in a second message. Here is how I have repurposed the letters comprising the first message (see the blue arrows):</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-I7X3JIjLisk/V_fSLoA3TVI/AAAAAAAAGsI/yYeIecwfMD4t6tCMPxsXCWGRTOmsm73FgCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-07%2Bat%2B12.48.10%2BPM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="224" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-I7X3JIjLisk/V_fSLoA3TVI/AAAAAAAAGsI/yYeIecwfMD4t6tCMPxsXCWGRTOmsm73FgCLcB/s320/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-07%2Bat%2B12.48.10%2BPM.png" width="320" /></a></div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">Notably on the page numbered "333" is the second message.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-wRp-eggqJCQ/V_fS6VpmHwI/AAAAAAAAGsM/_nPNOSFsGqguSHJJFFUSsaWL8JzocCXdwCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-07%2Bat%2B12.52.27%2BPM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="196" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-wRp-eggqJCQ/V_fS6VpmHwI/AAAAAAAAGsM/_nPNOSFsGqguSHJJFFUSsaWL8JzocCXdwCLcB/s320/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-07%2Bat%2B12.52.27%2BPM.png" width="320" /></a></div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: center;"><i><b>God, we need a tunnel thru time to save your people.</b></i></div><div style="text-align: center;"><i><b><br /></b></i></div><div style="text-align: left;">I'd long ago reached the conclusion that the Map of Time would be the invention that would be needed and it was symbolically reflected as the "Tunnel Thru the Air" in the novel. This message confirms that interpretation.<br /><br />You might note also in the narrative straddling pages 332 and 333 the sentences:</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-l-kBpXqlPvM/V_fUNOQFa_I/AAAAAAAAGsc/tVH8ATw-IjQTJuR3rQIpKHoDyk-81YF-wCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-07%2Bat%2B12.58.01%2BPM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-l-kBpXqlPvM/V_fUNOQFa_I/AAAAAAAAGsc/tVH8ATw-IjQTJuR3rQIpKHoDyk-81YF-wCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-07%2Bat%2B12.58.01%2BPM.png" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><br /><div style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; color: black; font-family: -webkit-standard; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;"></div><br /><div class="separator" style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; clear: both; color: black; font-family: -webkit-standard; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; margin: 0px; orphans: auto; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;">In my opinion, Mr. Gann is symbolically referring to a "tunnel thru time" using the image of a "tunnel thru the air."</div><br />Wish I understood how to use the Map of Time in the way it is intended; to predict as opposed to discover things that were predicted in it and have already happened.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">Part of the narrative of the first page instructs us that we need to have hope and wait with patience. Maybe the "tunnel thru time" will be understood when the time is right. Perhaps this is near the time to which Mr. Gann was referring when he said the world was not ready yet.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">Jim Ross</div>Jimhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14728986969466359235noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6256940740610422497.post-62598441576609985072016-10-07T08:14:00.002-07:002016-10-07T08:33:56.785-07:00Personal messages 1 of ???I recognize there comes a departure from things that I can prove to others and things that I can't. My work took a great departure from my view of the world when I found my name encoded in W D Gann's "The Tunnel Thru the Air" and, subsequently, the means to verify that it was me. I can pretty much prove by a preponderance of circumstance that, according to my old statistical randomness view of the world, that Mr. Gann was referring to me when <i><a href="http://markettimeandpricetownhall.blogspot.com/2015/03/wd-ganns-7th-prophecy-part-1.html" target="_blank">he spelled my name</a></i> and spelled my street address and the exact day I would find the street address. I can prove with a preponderance of circumstance that defies statistical improbability that he was referring to the World Trade Center when you wrote about the <i><a href="http://markettimeandpricetownhall.blogspot.com/2015/03/wd-ganns-manifested-prophecy-of-911.html" target="_blank">110-story Mammouth</a></i> (sp) building.<br /><br />But when it comes to the anagram messages that I am decoding, well, I understand how most people would skip talking about the proven things and fault the next leap of intuition/faith. Two years ago, I would have done that. After all, people "see what they want to see." They chose what they want to believe. As I've referenced before:<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-3Br888bzCYk/V_e0H1-bWBI/AAAAAAAAGrg/7tDfJe8Z9MMHV5Ov7UOiusbFHeTG-XlUgCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-07%2Bat%2B10.40.59%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="123" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-3Br888bzCYk/V_e0H1-bWBI/AAAAAAAAGrg/7tDfJe8Z9MMHV5Ov7UOiusbFHeTG-XlUgCLcB/s320/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-07%2Bat%2B10.40.59%2BAM.png" width="320" /></a></div><br />So, without statistical evidence or coincidence of the improbability of the below message and the additional ones I may post in the next day or two, here is one that I recently completed decoding. If you recall the "San Andreas wheel" within the "Emma and Ray wheel" from the essay, I was mathematically led to this message by the former. So I decided to spend time there. Immediate I saw the words "Read," "God," my name "Ross," "W D Gann," but the message still took a long time to understand.<br /><br />It was upon re reading the narrative of the page that it all fell into place. The line I am talking about in the narrative is line 12265 and I have highlighted it in yellow. It refers to "God's will." And that was the key to understanding the encoding in acrostic and telestic letters:<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-gM9U4ataTVA/V_e570myNAI/AAAAAAAAGr4/hx7X4-pcLfAmE56cC7bWuyyw_z1muAWJwCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-07%2Bat%2B11.05.36%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="257" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-gM9U4ataTVA/V_e570myNAI/AAAAAAAAGr4/hx7X4-pcLfAmE56cC7bWuyyw_z1muAWJwCLcB/s320/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-07%2Bat%2B11.05.36%2BAM.png" width="320" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><i><b>WD Gann sees 33 Ross would read about God's will.</b></i></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">There may be more to me message that I have not decoded but I get the gist of it. About that "33." I used each of those two threes you see on the page as wild cards for the 'l' in "will" and the 'u' in "about." In my construed rules of decoding, a single number can be used in a message up to four times. For example, the number 3 can be used once as a 'c,' once as a 'l,' once as a 'u' and once as the number itself.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">The ''33' is my Luo Clement "number." I was born on the 221st of the month which reduces to 3 and my given name is "James" which sums to 12 and reduces to 3. While I use the less formal name 'Jim' I pretty much consider myself the former.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">When I have a moment like this, I go back and read the plain narrative. I find a lot, a whole lot, in what is said on the plain narrative of pages 331, 332 and 333. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Getting back to being unable to prove messages like this. What is the probability the message given in bold italics would turn out to be so consistent with the plain narrative?</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">The convicted randomites would say I am conditioned to find what I want to find. I'd say ditto that back at you; you're conditioned to start from "it's impossible" before considering the evidence. I would further say, Mr. Gann is simply driving home the narrative's point by encoded repetition. Not a biggee.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">I guess it is according to what you chose to believe.... according to your faith as Marie would say.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Thanks for the 'attaboy' Mr. Gann.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Jim Ross</div>Jimhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14728986969466359235noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6256940740610422497.post-45342614026128387012016-10-06T02:59:00.001-07:002016-10-06T02:59:16.673-07:00Interesting how things might unfoldAn essay regarding an interpretation of imagined messages and predictions found in WD Gann's "The Tunnel Thru the Air was posted on 9/30/2016. It was intended to be the outline and medium for a subsequent video essay that I expected I could whip up on a mere day or two. <br /><br />Wrong. It took days that began at very early in the morning, not having slept for thinking of the presentation. At its very last stages, it became urgent because of something I'd discovered that last day.<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-zyZcN8b9w-o/V_Ya-r0UFAI/AAAAAAAAGqo/x4PhrMaRbT4NCk6QcP1M3o4fuWMEr7RIgCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-05%2Bat%2B1.16.47%2BPM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="177" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-zyZcN8b9w-o/V_Ya-r0UFAI/AAAAAAAAGqo/x4PhrMaRbT4NCk6QcP1M3o4fuWMEr7RIgCLcB/s400/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-05%2Bat%2B1.16.47%2BPM.png" width="400" /></a></div><br />12 years of Biblical captivity at 168 solar years per Biblical year would be 2016 or from 0001 to present.<br /><br />And the 10th month and 5th day would be yesterday.<br /><br />I felt obligated, panic driven to get the essay published. The iMovie or Youtube watch at about 4:30pm when I hit the publish/upload button told me it would take well over 6 hours and then there comes, after upload, the Youtube processing time. I'd failed.<br /><br />At it turned out, the upload and processing was complete at 6:18pm EST because I was watching the clock the moment it happened.<br /><br />And as it turned out, I'd met my goal which, according to my superstitious nature, seemed important.<br /><br />Satisfied that, if there were an obligation, I'd met it, I slept well until I woke up with two thoughts. First, the publication of the video-essay at 6:18pm on October 5 comes very close to exactly 7 days until the nightfall of October 12, 2016. I understand that to be the end of Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement. And, of course, it is the beginning of the seven days, October 12-19.<br /><br />[Hmmph, in my ignorance, I thought Yom Kippur began at nightfall on October 12. After looking it up it makes far greater sense that the seven days of judgement begins after Yom Kippur ends. Always learning. My apologies for my, hopefully decreasing, ignorance.]<br /><br />I was okay with that. I'd seen that synchronicity coming and "I" made that happen.<br /><br />But the second question in my mind was when I'd published the written narrative. I had to go back and check:<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-So3kJKQP4nY/V_Yanzbr_WI/AAAAAAAAGqs/1juokPTn0KIcOVIhw2n532-A-ueDvd3VACEw/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-06%2Bat%2B5.27.58%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="80" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-So3kJKQP4nY/V_Yanzbr_WI/AAAAAAAAGqs/1juokPTn0KIcOVIhw2n532-A-ueDvd3VACEw/s400/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-06%2Bat%2B5.27.58%2BAM.png" width="400" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Yeah, I kinda already knew; it was 9/30/2016 or exactly 12 days before that same Jewish holiest of days ends.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-1BAVSJiIm30/V_YfmjmBqYI/AAAAAAAAGrQ/9Kjz7hoZ_msO3kXN-_MZxqDCJrFnVuRDACLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-06%2Bat%2B5.55.11%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-1BAVSJiIm30/V_YfmjmBqYI/AAAAAAAAGrQ/9Kjz7hoZ_msO3kXN-_MZxqDCJrFnVuRDACLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-06%2Bat%2B5.55.11%2BAM.png" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">7 and 12. The same relation of John Dee's philosopher stone number of 252 to WD Gann's mystical number of 432 (the number of pages in The Tunnel). Fancy that.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Back in the day, I'd consider it just one of this "X files" moments to be dismissed. These days its something I do not want to forget,</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Jim Ross</div><br />Jimhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14728986969466359235noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6256940740610422497.post-20574479505286722122016-10-05T14:37:00.002-07:002016-10-05T16:25:16.278-07:00Video-essay "Remarkable Events" to Occur in October 2016The "'Remarkable Events' to Occur in October 2016" essay has been rendered into Youtube. The processing took about two hours and completed at 6:18pm EST. The entire run length is 1 hour and 24 minutes and, despite not having any experience whatsoever, I'm pleased with the result. I hope that it is a fitting tribute to W D Gann and an appropriate and compelling message.<br /><br />With this video-essay I'd hoped I could present information that viewers reluctant to spend the time studying historic text after a day of work would at least be able to absorb some of the information in a friendlier presentation. If a viewer catches only a couple items it might be be useful, particularly if they live on the Pacific Coast.<br /><br />A primary objective has been to create a summary I could provide to family members and friends who have loved ones on the Pacific Coast that would provide a complete argument and warning that they might consider. As well, such a summary would benefit others in a similar position.<br /><br />I previewed it twice, the first time correcting errors and arranging items. It does contain several additional messages and quite a bit of information that is not in the text summary; the narrative is exactly the same but there are some additional messages.<br /><br />As much as I hope that my interpretation of Mr. Gann's work is wrong about the coming weeks, I believe it is substantially correct. If nothing else, I've accumulated and presented a lot of relevant information so that viewers can make their own decision.<br /><br />With that said, following is the Youtube presentation.<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><iframe width="320" height="266" class="YOUTUBE-iframe-video" data-thumbnail-src="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/n06pzojDDlI/0.jpg" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/n06pzojDDlI?feature=player_embedded" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe></div><br />Jim RossJimhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14728986969466359235noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6256940740610422497.post-64179406671222614362016-10-04T04:39:00.002-07:002016-10-04T05:38:35.113-07:00That number 168Number of hours in the week, number of years in the WD Gann "Map of Time," and one fifteenth of the Biblical Great Week of 2520 years. That's the number 168. Interesting how that number might be constructed from Pythagorean gematria.<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-a_V3K7nd1Bw/V_OUUtSsjaI/AAAAAAAAGpU/3ZgHXrnIKYsPzEOW9muUaD-8Cwe2WiTWwCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-04%2Bat%2B7.36.33%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-a_V3K7nd1Bw/V_OUUtSsjaI/AAAAAAAAGpU/3ZgHXrnIKYsPzEOW9muUaD-8Cwe2WiTWwCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-04%2Bat%2B7.36.33%2BAM.png" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">I'm sure someone knows that but I didn't until last night, halfway asleep as I was. Didn't Mr. Gann write a mystical book regarding "The Magic Word (s)?" It would seem on point.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Jim Ross</div><br />Jimhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14728986969466359235noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6256940740610422497.post-40596559161679091002016-10-03T01:08:00.002-07:002016-10-04T04:51:53.957-07:00Handicapping what I "know""Know" said facetiously, of course.<br /><br />You sit there and stare at a page of acrostic and telestic letters in WD Gann's "The Tunnel Thru the Air" and you see "messages." Obviously you see what you want to see. But its a bit less biased than that. The first "word" that jumps out at you sets your mind on a course. Then you consider if the evolving message has a theme consistent with the narrative and other messages you've seen. So its not all imagination or delusion. There's a kernel of clear recognition from which a beginning is gotten. The supposed writer of the veiled message would take advantage of that.<br /><br />An example; the "three WMD" on page 284. This is what I "saw" the first time I looked at the page after discovering the acrostic and telestic encoding:<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-KbcIMJw4x-c/V_IGtAl5KeI/AAAAAAAAGng/UF9JYALlyYQnh7s_FH1TpiIW_dTrx934gCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-03%2Bat%2B3.19.35%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="221" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-KbcIMJw4x-c/V_IGtAl5KeI/AAAAAAAAGng/UF9JYALlyYQnh7s_FH1TpiIW_dTrx934gCLcB/s320/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-03%2Bat%2B3.19.35%2BAM.png" width="320" /></a></div><br />"WMD," a term of our terrorist themed society, and "three." Pretty much stick out at you. I couldn't make anything out of the page. But I was biased. Terror and a number of terror events.<br /><br />Later on I wrote essays on Mr. Gann's curious use of the word "blast" in describing Robert's hopes "blasted in a moment" upon losing Marie. And I discovered the encoding of "PGE" for Pacific Gas and Electric. Ditto that for the all caps"AL" inverted for "LA." Things start flowing together the more of The Tunnel's encodings are stored in your "attic."<br /><br />My bias was being artfully "formed" towards the creation of a message that, while completely indefensible on its own merits, had context and corroboration found elsewhere. <br /><br />You cannot know the parts without some knowledge of the whole. As Gurdjieffe said and I paraphrase out of recal, 'you cannot know a thing without knowing what it is a part of, what is a part of it, what came before it, what came after it, what is above it and what is below it.'<br /><br />So, the message above, given the conditioning in my study (as opposed to the 65 years of conditioning of the way I think) becomes:<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-sgc_lD6Lr0Y/V_IJCCQYkFI/AAAAAAAAGns/DHzRGxgCTAIZbHejp42uTf16b8aUUAUIQCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-03%2Bat%2B3.29.39%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="231" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-sgc_lD6Lr0Y/V_IJCCQYkFI/AAAAAAAAGns/DHzRGxgCTAIZbHejp42uTf16b8aUUAUIQCLcB/s400/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-03%2Bat%2B3.29.39%2BAM.png" width="400" /></a></div><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><i><b>"God may use three WMD's, tsunamis to blast LA California."</b></i></div><br />Look for the final warning of the Atlantis fire and then three natural events.<br /><br />A message consistent with all the other messages, not inconsistent with any. A message consistent with the first Allied Enemy campaign which is a decimation of the Pacific Coast. It all hangs together. Its not a "lock" but it is compelling to me in the context of all the other corroborative information I've discovered.<br /><br />"LA" falls on the same line as "10/15" in red. In the movie, "Knowing," the first disaster was October 15, about 15 1/2 hours after the newscast of a Gulf Oil disaster.<br /><br />So, out of all that I've so derived and somewhat subjectively "handicapped" in my mind according to this very imperfect "triangulation" of messages within The Tunnel and from other sources referenced in The Tunnel (two contemporary movies), here's the odds as they stand in my mind:<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-SNVuQJWYu5E/V_INiB5LmXI/AAAAAAAAGn4/uCOQf5Nspo4Fzl1tUmTLMkYfpv7mvpnmQCLcB/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-03%2Bat%2B3.49.12%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="236" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-SNVuQJWYu5E/V_INiB5LmXI/AAAAAAAAGn4/uCOQf5Nspo4Fzl1tUmTLMkYfpv7mvpnmQCLcB/s400/Screen%2BShot%2B2016-10-03%2Bat%2B3.49.12%2BAM.png" width="400" /></a></div><br />About that subjectivity and not knowing the whole; I don't. I have only clues dug out of now counting thousands of hours of research. Mr. Gann knew, I don't. All I can do is ferret out the clues and sum them up in the little hamster wheel in my head and add them up as best I can.<br /><br />Obviously, the stock market will be destroyed, if not by the events of October 12-19, then finished by the events that will comprise the remainder of the first Allied Enemy campaign (Portland and Seattle) and the second and third campaigns (the New Madrid Seismic Zone and Yellowstone). As WD Gann's office at 120 Liberty Street witnessed the destruction of the WTC to which it was near, if not, formally contiguous, then so will his offices at 82 Wall Street, next to Wall and Water Street, the proximate location of the first trades of the New York Stock Exchange, witness the destruction of the latter. [Hint, read up on the history of the NYSE and its first trading at the Tontine Coffee House at Wall and Water.] Judgement in the place of nativity. And Mr. Gann's office at 82 Wall Street will again <i><a href="http://markettimeandpricetownhall.blogspot.com/2016/10/120-liberty-street-and-82-wall-street.html" target="_blank">witness the destruction</a></i>.<br /><br />From time-to-time friends will pass along to me what the gurus are saying about the stock market. Many gurus have caught onto the idea that things are going to get really bad. In the vastly infrequent times I take a look at what they are saying, while they are coming to some vague view of the dire nature of impending events, they haven't a clue regarding the magnitude. Hmm, most will say that about me. The events of October 12-19 are of Biblical proportion. No, better described, they are Biblical. Worse, they will be only the first warning to all of us of worse events to occur thereafter.<br /><br />I hope I am wrong about what Mr. Gann is saying because, if I were to fully 'know" his message in its perfection, I don't believe he is wrong.<br /><br />Jim Ross<br /><br /><br />Jimhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14728986969466359235noreply@blogger.com0