So what you are saying is - 'Beyond that one can go to MESA' - that even after 
I should have found whatever modified version of FFT, MESA will give me better 
results. In other words, why playing with FFT if MESA is the right way to go. 
Is that your opinion or am I missing something ?

Ton


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: wavemechanic 
  To: [email protected] 
  Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 2:42 PM
  Subject: Re: [amibroker] FFT



  The restrictions associated with FFT that Ehlers mentions can be found in any 
textbook.  As for better results with FFT, the next step is to evaluate the 
cycles statistically (e.g., Bartels, F-ratio, chi-square, etc.).  Beyond that 
one can go to MESA and such.

  Bill
    ----- Original Message ----- 
    From: Ton Sieverding 
    To: [email protected] 
    Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 2:58 AM
    Subject: Re: [amibroker] FFT


    Frankly for me these are John Ehlers typical arguments to use his MESA 
model in stead of FFT and has nothing to do with a discussion. The question for 
me still remains if there really is no way to get better results with FFT than 
the ones we have got ? If Fourier analysis is correct and it's possible to 
simulate whatever continues timeseries with a bunch of sinewaves and if MESA 
can give me the correct harmonics, it should also be possible to obtain the 
same results with a modified version of FFT. Question is how ?

    Ton Sieverding.

      ----- Original Message ----- 
      From: wavemechanic 
      To: AmiBroker, User 
      Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 1:27 AM
      Subject: Re: [amibroker] FFT



      There is a discussion of FFT use and problems on Ehlers MESA website:

      http://www.mesasoftware.com/fftcomparison.htm

      Bill

      ----- Original Message ----- 
        From: Ara Kaloustian 
        To: AB-Main 
        Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2007 3:16 PM
        Subject: [amibroker] FFT


        I was playing with AB's FFT code that TJ provided...

        The cycles seem to shift relative to the data, based on how many data 
points are analyzed. This is of course expected.

        Question:

        Has anyone found a way to determine optimum number of data points to 
analyze, and then determine the relevance of the dominant cycle, or find any 
relevant cycles?

        Most of the time the dominant cycle seems to be the largest one 
available. 

        Has anyone been able to use these cycles succesfully?

        Ara 


------------------------------------------------------------------------


        No virus found in this incoming message.
        Checked by AVG Free Edition.
        Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.17/732 - Release Date: 
3/24/2007 4:36 PM




----------------------------------------------------------------------------


    No virus found in this incoming message.
    Checked by AVG Free Edition.
    Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.18/733 - Release Date: 3/25/2007 
11:07 AM


   

Reply via email to