Toolie
09-23-2005, 06:27 PM
In the... hopeful... day to day usage of your brain, you consider many different aspects of socialization and judgment on people with comparisons to standards in your mind and attempt to establish relations between qualities in your effort to exercise good judgment. These relationships between qualities, I've realized, is able to be described with mathematics.
In the next few days, I'll be sharing with you some thoughts I've had and some ways I've tried to explain them. If you want to venture into this, realize that these are just seemingly complicated mathematical ways of describing common-sense things. That's how it's supposed to be. Some basic calculus would be useful in understanding the full beauty in some of these concepts.
For now, I'll be discussing two qualities that have an interesting relationship most of us are familiar with: promiscuity and attractiveness. It seems interesting how some girls become "hotter" when the possibility of getting some action increases, but how universally the more and more slutty a woman becomes, the more their attractiveness drops. Some girls drop faster than others. Some girls are at their hottest when they are completely prudent, while some girls only begin to be seen as "hotter than average" when they become more promiscuous (think Sandra from Grease at the end... etc...)
If we take a girls promiscuity, and measured it with some arbitrary units, perhaps via surveys or some psychological surveys, and graphed it against the same persons view that woman's attractiveness, we might see the data suggest a curve similar to Figure 1.
http://www.flame2.com/images/slut1.gif
Figure 1: - The graph of an average Girl "A"
Now please note, this curve is strictly imaginary, and made with the curve tool in paint. I've been researching different curves and distributions that might be useful in suggesting a relationship - if one exists at all. While I have not conducted any serious research or gathered any data whatsoever, that is not my job. I'm an aspiring theoretical physicist, so right now, I'm doing some theoretical sociology. I'm terrible with experiment. Oh, I'm using mathematics. Because I'm a geek.
As you can see, we have reduced the relationship between qualities down to a function, namely attractiveness as a function of promiscuity. I chose attractiveness to be the function of promiscuity with the following rationality: the sample of girls to the subjects that would be used to gather this data would be known to them already, ie., their promiscuity would already be known and from there a value would be taken. Perhaps a completely different curve might be suggested if girls of unknown history were shown and subjects were to strictly guess on their promiscuity. Another great idea for an experiment.
We call this the function of Girl A and we have shown its graph in Figure 1.
While the actual rule of the function is unknown, I have defined the domain and desired range for the function. The function must be continuous along the interval [0, +inf], and for every P, A must be greater than zero. For the sake of realism, A may not equal zero and (theoretically) could have values of any magnitude. However, again for the sake of realism, the value of A at zero promiscuity (A sub 0) must not equal infinity, nor may any value of A equal infinity.
Speaking of A sub 0, let's discuss it's practical role. A sub 0 is the "hotness" of a woman - assuming she has zero promiscuity. Assuming that knowledge of a person is required to record a value of their sluttyness, A sub 0 would be the hotness of a girl you have never known anything about. Thus, A sub 0 is a girl's "first impression" hotness.
http://www.flame2.com/images/slut2.gif
Figure 2: The graph of 'good girl' Girl "B"
As you can see with Girl A (Fig 1), experimental data (theoretically) suggests that she becomes a bit more attractive the more promiscous she becomes, ie. the more she seems like she'll put out. The point where she becomes the most attractive is known as the maximum point. The coordinates for the maximum point are A sub max and P sub max. A sub max is the hottest possible rating a girl can get, and P sub max is how promiscious she would have to be in order to be that hot. Realistically, this is the point where the girl is not too slutty and not too prude, and thus at maximum hotness.
However, as you can see with Girl B, her attractiveness immediately drops off as P (promiscuity) increases beyond zero. Mathematically, this is explained by the graph's maximum point actually existing in quadrant II, which is beyond the domain of our function (in negative promiscuity). Thus, her maximum attractiveness is when she is pure and innocent. The further she dabbles into slut-dom, the more and more she drops off in hotness.
As you can see, after the maximum point, the function then decreases (perhaps logarithmically) toward zero. The function must converge on zero (for reasons explained in a moment), and thus this excludes certain curves which are not convergent.
http://www.flame2.com/images/slut3.gif
Figure 3: The graph of porn-star Girl "C"
Now, assuming that the function is convergent, the area under the curve is represented by H. H can be calculated by taking the definite integral of our function from zero to infinity. The area given by the integral is known as the "Hollywood factor". The longer it takes the curve to drop to infinity, the higher the maximum point is, amongst other factors, increases the geometric area under the curve. Thus, as you might expect, a porn star perhaps represented by Girl C (Figure 3) has an extreme Hollywood factor, with extreme sluttiness doing nothing to prevent a majority of respondants to list that girl as attractive. In contrast, Girl B has a minimal Hollywood factor, people in the porn industry would not make much money off this normal good girl.
Anyhow, if I confused you, I'm sorry. These are pretty common sense concepts that may have some mathematical relations to them. I'd love to share some more ideas I've had, so let me know how you liked it.
In the next few days, I'll be sharing with you some thoughts I've had and some ways I've tried to explain them. If you want to venture into this, realize that these are just seemingly complicated mathematical ways of describing common-sense things. That's how it's supposed to be. Some basic calculus would be useful in understanding the full beauty in some of these concepts.
For now, I'll be discussing two qualities that have an interesting relationship most of us are familiar with: promiscuity and attractiveness. It seems interesting how some girls become "hotter" when the possibility of getting some action increases, but how universally the more and more slutty a woman becomes, the more their attractiveness drops. Some girls drop faster than others. Some girls are at their hottest when they are completely prudent, while some girls only begin to be seen as "hotter than average" when they become more promiscuous (think Sandra from Grease at the end... etc...)
If we take a girls promiscuity, and measured it with some arbitrary units, perhaps via surveys or some psychological surveys, and graphed it against the same persons view that woman's attractiveness, we might see the data suggest a curve similar to Figure 1.
http://www.flame2.com/images/slut1.gif
Figure 1: - The graph of an average Girl "A"
Now please note, this curve is strictly imaginary, and made with the curve tool in paint. I've been researching different curves and distributions that might be useful in suggesting a relationship - if one exists at all. While I have not conducted any serious research or gathered any data whatsoever, that is not my job. I'm an aspiring theoretical physicist, so right now, I'm doing some theoretical sociology. I'm terrible with experiment. Oh, I'm using mathematics. Because I'm a geek.
As you can see, we have reduced the relationship between qualities down to a function, namely attractiveness as a function of promiscuity. I chose attractiveness to be the function of promiscuity with the following rationality: the sample of girls to the subjects that would be used to gather this data would be known to them already, ie., their promiscuity would already be known and from there a value would be taken. Perhaps a completely different curve might be suggested if girls of unknown history were shown and subjects were to strictly guess on their promiscuity. Another great idea for an experiment.
We call this the function of Girl A and we have shown its graph in Figure 1.
While the actual rule of the function is unknown, I have defined the domain and desired range for the function. The function must be continuous along the interval [0, +inf], and for every P, A must be greater than zero. For the sake of realism, A may not equal zero and (theoretically) could have values of any magnitude. However, again for the sake of realism, the value of A at zero promiscuity (A sub 0) must not equal infinity, nor may any value of A equal infinity.
Speaking of A sub 0, let's discuss it's practical role. A sub 0 is the "hotness" of a woman - assuming she has zero promiscuity. Assuming that knowledge of a person is required to record a value of their sluttyness, A sub 0 would be the hotness of a girl you have never known anything about. Thus, A sub 0 is a girl's "first impression" hotness.
http://www.flame2.com/images/slut2.gif
Figure 2: The graph of 'good girl' Girl "B"
As you can see with Girl A (Fig 1), experimental data (theoretically) suggests that she becomes a bit more attractive the more promiscous she becomes, ie. the more she seems like she'll put out. The point where she becomes the most attractive is known as the maximum point. The coordinates for the maximum point are A sub max and P sub max. A sub max is the hottest possible rating a girl can get, and P sub max is how promiscious she would have to be in order to be that hot. Realistically, this is the point where the girl is not too slutty and not too prude, and thus at maximum hotness.
However, as you can see with Girl B, her attractiveness immediately drops off as P (promiscuity) increases beyond zero. Mathematically, this is explained by the graph's maximum point actually existing in quadrant II, which is beyond the domain of our function (in negative promiscuity). Thus, her maximum attractiveness is when she is pure and innocent. The further she dabbles into slut-dom, the more and more she drops off in hotness.
As you can see, after the maximum point, the function then decreases (perhaps logarithmically) toward zero. The function must converge on zero (for reasons explained in a moment), and thus this excludes certain curves which are not convergent.
http://www.flame2.com/images/slut3.gif
Figure 3: The graph of porn-star Girl "C"
Now, assuming that the function is convergent, the area under the curve is represented by H. H can be calculated by taking the definite integral of our function from zero to infinity. The area given by the integral is known as the "Hollywood factor". The longer it takes the curve to drop to infinity, the higher the maximum point is, amongst other factors, increases the geometric area under the curve. Thus, as you might expect, a porn star perhaps represented by Girl C (Figure 3) has an extreme Hollywood factor, with extreme sluttiness doing nothing to prevent a majority of respondants to list that girl as attractive. In contrast, Girl B has a minimal Hollywood factor, people in the porn industry would not make much money off this normal good girl.
Anyhow, if I confused you, I'm sorry. These are pretty common sense concepts that may have some mathematical relations to them. I'd love to share some more ideas I've had, so let me know how you liked it.