-
Brick: True for POS(then)must be true for NEG.
Ok Norm,lets keep all the IF,BUT,AND out of the picture. If we have an absolute ev that will be mathematically achieved. Then the swings are predictable in either direction.
EV=
A)anticipated wins due to horrific negative swings will.. assure, B) anticipated losses due to tremendous positive swings.. which(both) ultimatlely arrives at expection=EV.
Mathematics says it is impossible for A to be true and B not to be true or vice versa.
Have I a new discovery here? No'it's only standard deviation. I know many enjoy using the word it's all meaningless this may be true for sessions but as we combine sessions as a whole and arrive ever so closer to *No.* then the word meaningless gradual turns into "meaningful"
Brick
> Well then it wouldn't be causal and would be
> accurate. And would be in 100% agreement
> with Parker's statement.
> Take the boolean algebra statement 'If a
> then b'
> If a is known to be false, the statement
> is true even if b is also false.
> If a is known to be true, then the
> statement is true only if b is known to be
> true.
> If a is unknown and b is always true, then
> the statement is true.
> In logic, no causal relationship is
> implied. The problem is that in English,
> statements that are logically true can imply
> a causal relationship that is untrue.
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
Bookmarks