Take a peek...

http://www.ultrasw.com/nth/pct/djm000414.htm

The above *human conflict* chart of Dow Jones futures contract (10:25
AM 4/13 - the close of 4/14) represents my efforts to identify and define
an aggregate seller control system reference level (red) and an
aggregate buyer control system reference level (green) tracking the
control variable of price (bold black).

I'm not at all prepared to get into the details of how I constructed this
model, but one thing of interest I notice is how it _may_ show an
example of two conflicting control systems (p. 254 B:CP) both
correcting their respective error simultaneously and experiencing about
zero error at the same time, prior to and around 15:20 4/13, even if only
very briefly.

It also _may_ demonstrate how easily reference levels may change
while the control variable remains steady. Then again I'm very much an
amature at PCT and I may have all this very mixed up and
backasswards.

Enjoy,
nth

[From Bill Powers (2000.04.16.1256 MDT)]

nth (2000.04.15)

The above *human conflict* chart of Dow Jones futures contract (10:25
AM 4/13 - the close of 4/14) represents my efforts to identify and define
an aggregate seller control system reference level (red) and an
aggregate buyer control system reference level (green) tracking the
control variable of price (bold black).

It seems a little strange that the actual closing price (blue line) is not
_between_ the two price reference levels, since one system is trying to
raise the price while the other is trying to lower it.

Best,

Bill P.

[From Norman Hovda (2000.04.16.0735 MST)]

[From Bill Powers (2000.04.16.1256 MDT)]

nth (2000.04.15)

>The above *human conflict* chart of Dow Jones futures contract (10:25 AM
>4/13 - the close of 4/14) represents my efforts to identify and define an
>aggregate seller control system reference level (red) and an aggregate
>buyer control system reference level (green) tracking the control variable
>of price (bold black).

It seems a little strange that the actual closing price (blue line) is not
_between_ the two price reference levels, since one system is trying to
raise the price while the other is trying to lower it.

Best,

Bill P.

As I mentioned I'm not at all sure I got his model set up properly, but for
the short time I've been monitoring the mkt with this tool, there are time
periods when price is between the reference levels.

I can, without torturing mkt logic, make a case for either buyer reference
level being above and seller reference level being below price in that
there clearly are times, in fact much of the time e.g., when the seller's
willingness or aggressiveness to buy/sell at any price, i.e., a market
order, yet the market gives a better price than expected.

It's easy for me to think in terms of the aggregate seller or buyer almost
by design having reference levels respectively lower or higher than
current price, otherwise why stay in the mkt? IOW the assumed goal of
the aggregate seller is lower prices; the buyer higher prices.

You'll recall Friday's mkt closed down, with this Dow futures contract
closing down 660 points; biggest one day point loss in history. IOW,
huge selling pressure and if there had been no opposing disturbance /
conflict, and the seller _had_ gotten his way, how much further would
the Dow have gone? Or will it go?

Think of it as a driver with pedal to the metal of an under powered four
cylinder pickup with a full load moving up hill, where the driver's
reference level is for a faster speed then the motor's output is capable of
producing.

Thanks for peeking.

Best,
nth