# Пётр-Noster

Peter-Noster is another way of saying this.

I’m here to help you. I’m here to call you lazy, bigot religious fanatic.

The Peter-Noster is the concept of price stepping outside of the parenting range, that becomes the elevatror/building block and there would be new oversold and overbought levels in each direction i.e. at 120%, 180%, -20%, -80%, -120% etc.

So, what is my problem with Fibonacci retracements?

There is nothing wrong with measuring things, there is nothing wrong with using percentages.

The problem is setting your mind on pseudo scientific things (meaningless fractions in this case) and attributing God-like status to them. This is a slippery slope and you should try to stay off of it, or you may end up believing in things like: God implanted dinosaur skeletons and fossils to challenge your faith & there was nothing before the creation. This type of behavior is always going to re-format the data to fit the narrative and there is simply nothing objective about that.

Change the settings on your scissor-tool to rational numbers before it’s too late.

My take on the subject of future growth that it is a non-quantifiable outburst with the aim of an extra 50%, but as a probability I would point to 45% of the parenting size to be achieved as a high likelihood, for this is what charts are suggesting me (projected distance), and 61.81394521% (aka the garden ratio) is some made up, idealistic crap.

Let’s try to appreciate what is happening here.

Having discussed the 45% you may start to appreciate looking for this telltale of growth, an indication of an end of a divergent leg (referencing the parenting range as measuring leg). This is what you need, the exit, the end of the move for a rotation into the other direction.

`````` if (Period()>60 && iHigh(NULL,240,i+3)-iLow(NULL,240,i+1)>FSize*27*Point && iLow(NULL,240,i+1)<iLow(NULL,240,i+3) && iLow(NULL,240,i+1)-(iHigh(NULL,240,i+3)-iLow(NULL,240,i+1))*.5<iMA(NULL,0,52,0,MODE_EMA, PRICE_LOW,i)-FMax*5.5*Point && !(iClose(symbol,240,i+1)>iMA(NULL,240,52,0,MODE_EMA, PRICE_MEDIAN,i+1) && iLow(symbol,240,i+1)<iMA(NULL,240,52,0,MODE_EMA, PRICE_MEDIAN,i+1)) && iLow(NULL,240,iLowest(NULL,0,MODE_LOW,3,i))<iLow(NULL,240,iLowest(NULL,0,MODE_LOW,9,i+3))-250*Point){
if (Period()==240){   LowBuffer2[i]=iLow(NULL,240,i+1);
HighBuffer2[i]=iLow(NULL,240,i+1)-(iHigh(NULL,240,i+3)-iLow(NULL,240,i+1))*.5; ``````

If we call a 30 or so percent move an excess, a 45+ percent move should be called a success.

Scaling in, that’s right. At the non-Fibonacci ratios of 30% and at 45%.

Where are you wrong? At 80% – hedge it.

``````ObjectCreate("Fiba", OBJ_FIBO, 0, Time[10], NBEU[0], Time[10],NBED[0]);

string fiboobjnams = "Fiba";

ObjectSet(fiboobjnams, OBJPROP_FIBOLEVELS, 17);
ObjectSet(fiboobjnams, OBJPROP_FIRSTLEVEL, 0.0);
ObjectSetFiboDescription(fiboobjnams,0,"0     %\$");
ObjectSet(fiboobjnams, OBJPROP_FIRSTLEVEL+1, 0.20);
ObjectSetFiboDescription(fiboobjnams,1,"20-OS   %\$");
ObjectSet(fiboobjnams, OBJPROP_FIRSTLEVEL+2, 0.4);
ObjectSetFiboDescription(fiboobjnams,2,"40     %\$");
ObjectSet(fiboobjnams, OBJPROP_FIRSTLEVEL+3, 0.50);
ObjectSetFiboDescription(fiboobjnams,3,"50     %\$");
ObjectSet(fiboobjnams, OBJPROP_FIRSTLEVEL+4, 0.6);
ObjectSetFiboDescription(fiboobjnams,4,"60     %\$");
ObjectSet(fiboobjnams, OBJPROP_FIRSTLEVEL+5, 0.8);
ObjectSetFiboDescription(fiboobjnams,5,"80-OB   %\$");
ObjectSet(fiboobjnams, OBJPROP_FIRSTLEVEL+6, 1.000);
ObjectSetFiboDescription(fiboobjnams,6,"100.0     %\$");
ObjectSet(fiboobjnams, OBJPROP_FIRSTLEVEL+7, -0.3);
ObjectSetFiboDescription(fiboobjnams,7,"-30->80     %\$");
ObjectSet(fiboobjnams, OBJPROP_FIRSTLEVEL+8, -0.45);
ObjectSetFiboDescription(fiboobjnams,8,"-45->C.NBE   %\$");

ObjectSet(fiboobjnams, OBJPROP_FIRSTLEVEL+9, 1.3);
ObjectSetFiboDescription(fiboobjnams,9,"130->20     %\$");
ObjectSet(fiboobjnams, OBJPROP_FIRSTLEVEL+10, 1.45);
ObjectSetFiboDescription(fiboobjnams,10,"145->C.NBE  %\$");

ObjectSet(fiboobjnams, OBJPROP_FIRSTLEVEL+11, 2.0);
ObjectSetFiboDescription(fiboobjnams,11,"200     %\$");
ObjectSet(fiboobjnams, OBJPROP_FIRSTLEVEL+12, 3.0);
ObjectSetFiboDescription(fiboobjnams,12,"300     %\$");

ObjectSet(fiboobjnams, OBJPROP_FIRSTLEVEL+13, -1.0);
ObjectSetFiboDescription(fiboobjnams,13,"-100     %\$");
ObjectSet(fiboobjnams, OBJPROP_FIRSTLEVEL+14, -2.0);
ObjectSetFiboDescription(fiboobjnams,14,"-200     %\$");

ObjectSet(fiboobjnams, OBJPROP_FIRSTLEVEL+15, -0.8);
ObjectSetFiboDescription(fiboobjnams,15,"-80   %\$");
ObjectSet(fiboobjnams, OBJPROP_FIRSTLEVEL+16, 1.80);
ObjectSetFiboDescription(fiboobjnams,16,"180   %\$");

ObjectSet( "Fiba", OBJPROP_LEVELCOLOR, clrNavy) ;
ObjectsRedraw();

}``````

Where are the market profile people wrong? Not understanding the relativity to the consolidation mean and calling both a success and an excess an excess. Well they are, but there is a major difference between the two. Final vs temporary.

Now, let’s do modular music today on this wide array of healing frequencies.

Definately not in Zaire.