<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Reality Base &#187; probability</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/realitybase/tag/probability/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/realitybase</link>
	<description>A blog about science, politics, and how to let each help the other without compromising them both.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Oct 2009 12:00:10 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>The Hindenburg Omen Was Right Again: Stock Market Plunges</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/realitybase/2008/10/06/the-hindenburg-omen-was-right-again-stock-market-plunges/</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/realitybase/2008/10/06/the-hindenburg-omen-was-right-again-stock-market-plunges/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Oct 2008 15:18:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Melissa Lafsky</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Science Goes to Washington]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[probability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[stock market]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/realitybase/2008/10/06/the-hindenburg-omen-was-right-again-stock-market-plunges/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
You may recall that nerves were jangled this summer over the appearance of a recent Hindenburg Omen—the mathematical formula that measures the probability of a stock market crash, and has reportedly predicted every crash since 1985. Granted, the appearance of an omen didn&#8217;t necessarily mean a crash was incoming—though a &#8220;confirmed&#8221; omen, such as the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><script src="http://w.sharethis.com/widget/?wp=2.3.1&amp;publisher=67cc06de-58af-40be-9e8e-7c994abde46a" type="text/javascript" charset="utf-8"></script></p>
<p><img src="http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/realitybase/files/2008/07/dow.JPG" alt="DOW industrial average" align="left" />You may recall that <a href="http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/realitybase/2008/07/24/is-a-mathematical-formula-spelling-stock-market-doom/" target="_blank">nerves were jangled this summer</a> over the appearance of a recent Hindenburg Omen—the mathematical formula that measures the probability of a stock market crash, and has reportedly predicted every crash since 1985. Granted, the appearance of an omen didn&#8217;t necessarily mean a crash was incoming—though a &#8220;confirmed&#8221; omen, such as the one in June, substantially upped the chances of the market tanking.</p>
<p>Well, it <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/07/business/07markets.html?_r=1&amp;hp&amp;oref=slogin" target="_blank">looks like the numbers didn&#8217;t lie</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/realitybase/2008/10/06/the-hindenburg-omen-was-right-again-stock-market-plunges/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>12</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Is a Mathematical Formula Spelling Stock Market Doom?</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/realitybase/2008/07/24/is-a-mathematical-formula-spelling-stock-market-doom/</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/realitybase/2008/07/24/is-a-mathematical-formula-spelling-stock-market-doom/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jul 2008 21:19:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Melissa Lafsky</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Science Goes to Washington]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[probability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[stock market]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/realitybase/2008/07/24/is-a-mathematical-formula-spelling-stock-market-doom/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Wall Streeters are buzzing about a possible mathematical sign of economic apocalypse. Called the Hindenburg Omen, it&#8217;s a formula that measures the probability of a stock market crash (defined as a 15 percent or greater decline). Hindenburg Omens have reportedly predicted every crash since 1985—though of course, the old correlation v. causation problem means [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img src="http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/realitybase/files/2008/07/dow.JPG" alt="DOW industrial average" align="left" />The <a href="http://online.barrons.com/article/SB121512476279728057.html?mod=googlenews_barrons" target="_blank">Wall Streeters are buzzing</a> about a possible mathematical sign of economic apocalypse. Called the Hindenburg Omen, it&#8217;s a formula that measures the probability of a stock market crash (<a href="http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article5334.html" target="_blank">defined as a 15 percent or greater</a> decline). Hindenburg Omens have reportedly predicted every crash since 1985—though of course, the old correlation v. causation problem means that a Hindenburg Omen occurring doesn&#8217;t <em>necessarily</em> mean a crash is on the way.</p>
<p>The five criteria for a full-fledged omen—called a &#8220;confirmed&#8221; Hindenburg Omen—are <a href="http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article5334.html" target="_blank">as follows</a>:</p>
<blockquote><p>[T]he daily number of NYSE New 52 Week Highs and the Daily number of New 52 Week Lows must both be so high as to have the lesser of the two be greater than 2.2 percent of total NYSE issues traded that day&#8230;The traditional definition had two more filters: That the NYSE 10 Week Moving Average is also Rising, which we consider met if it is higher than the level 10 weeks earlier (condition # 2), and that the McClellan Oscillator is negative on that same day (condition # 3)&#8230;</p>
<p><span id="more-130"></span></p>
<p>Condition # 4 requires that New 52 Week NYSE Highs cannot be more than twice New 52 Week Lows, however it is okay for New 52 Week Lows to be more than double New 52 Week Highs&#8230;</p>
<p>The fifth condition&#8230;is that for a <strong><em>confirmed </em></strong> Hindenburg Omen&#8230;there must be more than one signal within a 36 day period, i.e., <strong><em>there must be a cluster of Hindenburg Omens (defined as two or more) to substantially increase the probability of a coming stock market plunge  </em></strong></p></blockquote>
<p>Sure enough, June brought not only a <a href="http://www.tradingmarkets.com/.site/news/Stock%20News/1716782/" target="_blank">20-month low</a> in the stock market but also a bona fide Hindenburg Omen. So what does it mean?  According to <a href="http://www.tradingmarkets.com/.site/news/Stock%20News/1716782/" target="_blank">John Nyaradi</a>, &#8220;the bottom line here would indicate a 92 percent chance of at least a small decline on the Dow, a more than 75 percent chance of a greater than 5 percent decline, and a 65 percent chance of a panic selloff or crash.&#8221; Omens or no, we&#8217;d say there&#8217;s <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/24/stocks-tumble-after-sales_n_114824.html" target="_blank">enough chance of that happening</a> to convince even the biggest skeptic.</p>
<p><script src="http://w.sharethis.com/widget/?wp=2.3.1&amp;publisher=67cc06de-58af-40be-9e8e-7c994abde46a" type="text/javascript" charset="utf-8"></script></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/realitybase/2008/07/24/is-a-mathematical-formula-spelling-stock-market-doom/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>14</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
