Wave59 Technologies

Greetings all! I just wanted to share a chart showing the progressed time resonance and where we are today.
SPY daily, I was looking for the break and had forecasted 2/18 as the CIT. Just amazing how it has played out.

W59PRO2 by Master E, simply the best.

Hey G,

I always think it's interesting to see which tools end up being popular, and which don't. I personally think they're all great, but for whatever reason, sometimes some end up not being very popular for whatever reason. I think you may be like one of the two people who has ever truly grabbed on to that particular tool, despite how cool it is. Sepharial thought up some pretty amazing stuff.

Earik

Wait -- "progressed time." What is that?

I mean, I understand what is going on here, at least in terms of my model which produces exactly this time point from those swings, but I've never heard this term applied and know nothing of Sepharial...I'm amazed but not totally surprised. How about that?

Todd

Hi Todd,

In one of his numerology books, Sepharial discussed a method that he used to predict the number of births to win a particular contest that was being run. You take a set of three or more numbers, find the differences, then look at the differences to those differences ( ) and use that to solve for a future point, assuming that the differences of the differences are holding to a particular pattern. Clear as mud?

Here's an example.

Let's say we had three numbers, and are trying to solve for the fourth: 100, 200, 500. So we stack them up:

100
200
500
X

We are looking to solve for X. So let's take the differences. (This is easy to do on paper, harder on a computer...)

100
+100
200
+300
500
+?
X

So the 100 and 300 off to the right are the differences. Start at 100, add 100 to get to number 2 (200). Start at number 2 and add 300 to get to number 3 (500). So now we have the differences of the differences (100 and 300, off to the right). If we assume a linear progression, it's 200 between them, so we can estimate what the "?" is between 500 and X, which is another 200. That gives:

100
+100
200 +200
+300
500 +200 (we hold this constant, the progressed factor)
+500 (which gives us this value)
700 (which gives us this final forecast!)

Sepharial actually added another example, and looked for the pattern in the secondary differences, not just assuming a +200 like I did here. But this is easier to give you an idea, and there are lots of ways to do this. My twist on the whole thing was to ditch the linear progressions he used for the contest, and use Gann's square of nine instead, and it all tends to solve out nicely on markets if you're trying to find future turning points, as G has demonstrated.

Earik

Earik,

Is the future point calculated by actual time, or by bar numbers?

Thanks,

Kim

p.s.: Good to see you posting again, G.!

Kim,

I edited my response. See if that helps. I can't remember exactly what I was doing, since all this happened 10 years ago... LOL I'm pretty sure it has to do with cycle lengths rather than actual bar numbers. But I did it in time. I think there's a way to do it in price too, but like so many market related investigations, that research got sidetracked when something cooler showed up, and right now it's still an idea.

Earik

Hi Earik,

Ha! Those linear progressions definitely don't have any relation to my calculations for those swings, and I have to admit to not getting the specificity I wanted and giving up on numbered squares long ago (except for the Lambdoma, which is a treasure), so the mystery deepens! So many ways, so little time.

Thanks as always,

Todd

Greetings Earthlings. A probable CIT study based on fractional price resonance.



Saturn transit to the Natal H, verified our Progressed Time CIT.

Just a follow up chart. Compelling, and multiple studies point to the waning of negative actors.

Hi G,



Well, it’s certainly been a while hasn’t it? Anyhow I was going over your charts and much like Todd I don’t know much about progressed time analysis, though am aware of Sepharial (Dr Walter Gorn Old) and slightly familiar with his work. Emphasis on slightly. Therefore I was wondering if you could elaborate a bit, especially on that first chart which has me totally confused.

All the best,
Joe