Am I Wrong Here? Sell High, Buy Dip > Hold Through Dip at OG prices

To keep it short and simple (I'm more than happy to elaborate either in an edit or comment), if I bought a stock at $10 and it rose up to $30, I then sold it, and then bought it again when the market dropped and it was at $15, and I continue to hold it to whatever the end result would be, lets say $45 and then I'm out. Is that better/more profitable, then just holding all the original shares until it hits 45?

I bought MU at $450, and I took my principle out when it hit 805, now I know it skyrocketed even further, and has more room to grow, but my profit is just chilling and growing. I got in at DRAM at $45 and I'm wondering if it would have been more profitable to sell when it hit it's month high, and bought back in like now for instance.

I'm not trying to out time the market per say. I just had a hunch last week (before I even knew the job numbers were coming out, I'm completely new to all this), but the advice I've been reading is to stay. I didn't buy SPCE like everyone else said to because my gut said not too. So I guess I'm trying to algin my gut with what I know and kinda game theory some stuff out.

For me, I don't think it maths out to sell at the candle, then buy back in at the dip when I bought so early that the dip is no where near my entry price. Those shares are still more profitable then the shares I'd buy at the dip, even if i sold at the peak.

Am I wrong here?
Is this total newbie non-sense?
Someone help a brotha out!

Also, INTL is KILLING ME. I bought in at $130 my $22k is now $18k and it hurts my soul (total retail invested amount is at about 60k, was up to 70k on Monday)