Imagine a worker on an assembly line screwing in iPhone screws, staring at the same step every day. Over time, he starts confidently saying: I’ve mastered the underlying logic of Apple product design, I can reconstruct the entire product philosophy. Sounds absurd, right?

But in the trading market, this kind of thing happens every day. Retail investors hold just a small amount of information—a few candlesticks, a few news items, occasional signs of capital movement—and immediately start to fill in the gaps with their own assumptions about institutional strategies, convinced they can see through the main players’ next move a step ahead.

In essence, it’s using extremely limited fragments of information to infer a vast and complex system. The absurdity lies in the fact that the same logical flaws are obvious in the iPhone example, but on the market, they seem perfectly reasonable. What is hidden behind this stark contrast?