Bitcoin to C. P-Modeling Pt 27. Model Residual & Compound Error.I want to start off by saying thank you to everyone who has talked with me in chat and who lurks in the background with curiosity about this new theoretical linear regression modeling I have been designing. When I started this on 3.22.18 I never thought it would go a month without failure. I thought it was going to fail within the week of trying it out. But here we are.. 32 days later. It finally failed. Or did it?
One thing you should understand is that what I am doing is new. It is Theoretical. Thus being it is theoretical, it must be tested for any type of possible validity.
I am certain i have found validity in what I am doing, so I will keep doing it. Despite any failures, or incorrect calls, or emotional builds ups only leading to disappointment. Is that not the fun of it? I found this stuff ultra fun and it works a good portion of the time it seems. But I am only human.. Humans make mistakes.
Lets talk about mistakes.
When rendering a model in my algorithm, the proposition that upholds the belief theory is subjective to a degree. I chose the best place I THINK it would go. Period. I follow the geometry as I see it in my eyes. That is subjective. No A.I. in crypyto trading has the ability to have subjectivity. But I do. No A.I algorithm created has subjectivity, unless it is a hybrid that incorporates HUMANS into it's analysis. The human operator is the most important aspect in understanding the real complex nature of human emotion and its interplay in something like crypto trading; as all bots programmed to trade (are based on emotions, and desires of the HUMAN programmer). Thus bots although automatic, ooze the emotional desires of the human programmer. An observable behavioral phenomena, to the train eyed.
My Human Error in rendering models has led to what I am terming, 'Model Residual'. This is the idea that the subjectivity of my choice to render a model in 3D-(X ,Y Z) space in the vector matrix, causes a chance like probability that my Model is not "Modeled/Rendered" in the most efficient spot vs another (X, Y, Z) space in the vector matrix.
This residual of the incorrect placement in the vector matrix compounds over time with each added Model.
I have gone 32 days without accounting for each Models residual in the vector matrix, which is caused by my human subjectivity. My subjective placement of each model was probably not the most "efficient rendering location" it could of gone VS. if we ran the same scenario with an A.I. program this program would be bound to very strict logic and math. No subjectivity allowed. But without subjectivity you LOSE valuable data. This is the key component of the algorithm. Subjectivity. :)
OH NO, NOT SUBJECTIVITY!!! YOU OBVIOUSLY DON'T UNDERSTAND THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD. (screams every hard bound scientist in the world reading this).
What if we could MEASURE subjectivity and use it as a quantifiable foundation for accurate prediction forecasting? NOT POSSIBLE (screams the scientists).
Oh but it is.. And we are doing it now. :)
Compounding Error:
Every model has residual the compounds on the next model, and goes all the way through the sequence until the end of that sequence. The residual compounded must then PLAY OUT AT THE END OF THE SEQUENCE once a sequence failure occurs.
We just reached the end of our sequence. But have not violated ANY of the modeling rules except not having our criticality shift.
The criticality shift.. occurs AFTER the END of the subjective residual of the modeling sequence.
So what I am saying is.. The modeling residual due to subjectivity create the criticality shift, AFTER the end of the sequence.
WE are IN the CRITICALITY SHIFT NOW. And my subjective error predicted the timeframe of Criticality till we shift..
I am sorry if you are confused.
As always, thanks for looking!
Glitch420
