Defects in the Roman calendar
The single greatest short coming of modern finance is a completer failure to try anything new at the most basic level of how we observe and calibrate financialmarkets. This is of central importance when developing modern financial theory, the simple fact is that the Roman Calendar is almost two thousand years old and as such is out of date an is of no practical use for the management of modern financial systems.
We cannot possible expect meaningful results using this out dated concept and method of measurement our time scale, the single biggest problem is that it makes it hard to calculate the number of days between dates and so people just don’t do it and assume its random.
The reason the Latin numerals were such a hit is because they make the maths operations easy to do, using roman notation to mark off time has the same effect on the way we look at charts it is difficult to see the cycles with any clarity.
The base ten number system is also not without its problems, specifically markets are exponential which is obscured by base ten scales.
As long as we are using the Roman calendar and the base ten number system we will always have the same problems. These scales are just not suitable for the calibration of the market observations.
Using a 2060 year old Roman tax calendar which is calibrated to the Goddess of Gates and Doorways Janus on 1 Jan makes no sense.
I put it to you that everything we know or well at least everything we think we know about how the Western financial system works is fatally flawed for two simple reasons they are as follows.
- Every chart of every price history of an economic or financial time series no matter what it was or what time frame it was scaled to the X axis in terms of the Roman calendar
- The Y axis in the base ten number system instead of exponential scale.
I ask you why are we using a two thousand year old method to measure time? In what way is the Roman calendar relevant to modern times?
What if the markets are not as random as our intuition would lead us to believe, when in fact the real problem is the way we are measuring them using out dated scales as our calibration methods.
What we need are correctly calibrated diffraction grids which by definition have a reliable relevant scientific scales with known calibration points.
The Roman calendar and the base ten system don’t even have the same base number and are therefore a mismatched pair and any observations made using them cannot be considered reliable or relevant.
The key problem with the Roman calendar is that it introduces aliasing into the data because of the fact that if you are looking for a cycle which by definition has a period containing 360 degrees and you are only taking 258 samples. That is business days in a year and you are using a 365.254 day year to do it.
What you will get is a moiré pattern in your data, which will turn any type of frequency spectrum into a fractured mess.
Or to put it another way it will be like looking at an image in a shattered mirror.