This is one of the services the market provides. It creates uniform price conditions across time and space. If there is a discrepancy that doesn't make sense (like a recurring profitable pattern in stock prices), you can make money by fixing it.
"Trading numbers", as you call it, is (through a layer or two of indirection) helping to establish true prices, transmit market information, provide liquidity, etc. All of these things are critical for "real business" to operate efficiently in a large economy. The abstract markets create huge value for "real business" and its users charge a small percentage of the value created.
Problem is, those patterns do exist, but they are chaotic behaviors, and transition probabilities are already priced in. So that, for a non-causal analyst looking at past data they look very reliable, but for somebody with no forward knowledge, they are useless.
Or, in other words, the way those market analysis courses and gurus teach people to read the market. The patterns are very reliable if you ignore causality.
Past performance is no guarantee of future results.
Although I'm very skeptical about those patterns, because there could be someone trading back and forth to create those trends, and screw you when they want.
Anyway analyzing data and gaining money with it makes really no sense at all. Surely you can make money to live, but there is no point to it until you really are able to win big, and nobody does. Investing money where real business create economic activities that are in effective demand, maybe. But trading numbers, that's really an awful thing.