More from VVikas Kumaarr
More from Nifty
#Nifty
So now that Nifty has undergone ABC correction in the expected manner, what to expect next?
I think we have started larger degree wave 3, once 16800 was crossed.
16800 is the reference level now. We will get more sense by end of next week/ month. https://t.co/KsziuUpZxU
#NIFTY
If 17445 is taken out, then may be we are heading to fresh new all time on Nifty.
Things may pan out way faster than expected.
#NIFTY
Zoomed in cross-section of the chart above.
Wave 3 of 1 should have started today, which can take Nifty to fresh all time highs.
#NIFTY
So now Nifty is moving more clearly on the expected path, what's next?
Nifty has started longer term wave 3 advancement, pending final confirmation of HH by crossing 17800.
In Wave 1 of 3, can expect a move to 20k+.
In terms of longer term wave structure:
Wave 1: 7500 to 18600
Wave 3: 15700 to 35000+
And this can pan out over next 2 years or so.
Since wave 2 was a shallow correction, wave 4 can potentially be a deeper correction.
So now that Nifty has undergone ABC correction in the expected manner, what to expect next?
I think we have started larger degree wave 3, once 16800 was crossed.
16800 is the reference level now. We will get more sense by end of next week/ month. https://t.co/KsziuUpZxU
I am no expert in Wave Theory, but can this be a possible path over next few weeks/months?
— Mayank Narula (@Mayank_Narula1) December 6, 2021
Views requested. @idineshptl @indiacharts @nishkumar1977 pic.twitter.com/u3DjEeqoqB
#NIFTY
If 17445 is taken out, then may be we are heading to fresh new all time on Nifty.
Things may pan out way faster than expected.
#NIFTY
Zoomed in cross-section of the chart above.
Wave 3 of 1 should have started today, which can take Nifty to fresh all time highs.
#NIFTY
So now Nifty is moving more clearly on the expected path, what's next?
Nifty has started longer term wave 3 advancement, pending final confirmation of HH by crossing 17800.
In Wave 1 of 3, can expect a move to 20k+.
In terms of longer term wave structure:
Wave 1: 7500 to 18600
Wave 3: 15700 to 35000+
And this can pan out over next 2 years or so.
Since wave 2 was a shallow correction, wave 4 can potentially be a deeper correction.
You May Also Like
The Eye of Horus. 1/*
I believe that @ripple_crippler and @looP_rM311_7211 are the same person. I know, nobody believes that. 2/*
Today I want to prove that Mr Pool smile faces mean XRP and price increase. In Ripple_Crippler, previous to Mr Pool existence, smile faces were frequent. They were very similar to the ones Mr Pool posts. The eyes also were usually a couple of "x", in fact, XRP logo. 3/*
The smile XRP-eyed face also appears related to the Moon. XRP going to the Moon. 4/*
And smile XRP-eyed faces also appear related to Egypt. In particular, to the Eye of Horus. https://t.co/i4rRzuQ0gZ 5/*
I believe that @ripple_crippler and @looP_rM311_7211 are the same person. I know, nobody believes that. 2/*
Today I want to prove that Mr Pool smile faces mean XRP and price increase. In Ripple_Crippler, previous to Mr Pool existence, smile faces were frequent. They were very similar to the ones Mr Pool posts. The eyes also were usually a couple of "x", in fact, XRP logo. 3/*
The smile XRP-eyed face also appears related to the Moon. XRP going to the Moon. 4/*
And smile XRP-eyed faces also appear related to Egypt. In particular, to the Eye of Horus. https://t.co/i4rRzuQ0gZ 5/*
This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?
Imagine for a moment the most obscurantist, jargon-filled, po-mo article the politically correct academy might produce. Pure SJW nonsense. Got it? Chances are you're imagining something like the infamous "Feminist Glaciology" article from a few years back.https://t.co/NRaWNREBvR pic.twitter.com/qtSFBYY80S
— Jeffrey Sachs (@JeffreyASachs) October 13, 2018
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?