4 ms·
> If you imagine zooming in on a stock price, with each successive zoom closer it remains self similar, looking perpetually like a noisy stock chart. Unless so
by nordsieck 6y ago
> If you imagine zooming in on a stock price, with each successive zoom closer it remains self similar, looking perpetually like a noisy stock chart.
Unless some exchange has allowed traders to infinitely divide currency, that's doesn't seem like it could be true.
- baron_harkonnen 6y agoLikewise you could argue that the coastline problem is limited to at most the Planck length. Most models of stock movement are modeled mathematically with Brownian motion which is by definition a continuous time process. You can even more trivially show that stocks are non-differentiable if you want to argue that they are fundamentally discrete time processes, in which, by definition, they are not continuous, differentiable functions. But the argument of about "what does continuous even mean when we talk about physical systems" is another and older argument altogether.
- pdonis 6y ago> you could argue that the coastline problem is limited to at most the Planck length Only if the Planck length were really a minimum possible length. But it might not be; even in a theory of quantum gravity, it might not be, since what is quantized in quantum gravity does not have to be lengths and times.