MarvinMouse's Journal: Mathematical evaluation of Women

I just know I am going receive a lot of feminist comments about this journal entry. But what the hell. I guess it's just a good time and place for me to vent.

Theorem:

Okay. Well, I defined attractiveness of woman has having three different variables.

p = physical attractiveness of a woman
f = femininity of a woman
i = intelligence of a woman

Now, there is an interesting relation between these properties... They are all inversely related. Thus

p = 10 - 1/(k(t)/(f*i))^2 k is the equation of beauty with respect to time. In general, it appears that this equation is very similar to a skewed probability distribution. Thereby having a low beauty at a young age, and slowly reaching it's peak at an individual time for each woman, and then slowly declining towards zero with age.

f = 10 - 1/(l(t,c,f)/(p*i))^2 l is the equation of feminity with respect to time, children and family. In general the higher the number of children and stronger the family ties, commonly leads to a more feminine woman. As time progresses as well, It seems that a woman becomes more feminine until they reach a peak (like the beauty one) and slowly decline with age. Note: Some woman die before reaching this peak.

i = 10 - 1/(m(t,w,s)/p*f)^2 m in this equation is the equation of intelligence wrt time, wisdom and schooling. Wisdom generally is a constant, but can increase slowly with age. generally, as time progresses m increases. Yet, sometimes a disease or injury can cause a non-linear change in this equation. Finally, s is schooling, this includes all teaching a woman receives from other people.

Now...

If we look at these equations, we discover quickly that the perfect attractive woman (intelligent, feminine, and physically attractive), becomes progressively hard to reach as each variable is inversely related to the others. (This was deduced from experiment with a random sample of approximately 100 women I was oglin.. ahem... studying at my university. ;-)

Now, we look at probabilities to see if it is possible for me to find someone who fits a level of attractiveness that every man wants.

Well, using a non-biased sample (me), I would say that men probably would like a woman who is even among the three attributes, approximately 7.5. If the equations are examined, it can be noted that all three attributes will exist within the range [0,10), where 10 requires an infinite amount of the three to exist.

Well, to accomplish this, we see easily that
solving for physical attractiveness function k.

k >= sqrt(f^2*i^2/10-p)
let p = i = f = 7.5

k >= 35.58

(It is easy to see that all of the functions will have to be >= 35.58)

Now, from testing the mean is approximately 11.18 (because most people are p=i=f=5). With a standard deviation of approximately 6. (This of course includes some standardized methods to adjust for skewing, etc.)

Now, it becomes painfully obvious how difficult it would be for all three of the functions to have a value of 35.58. (Albeit, one function can have an incredibly high value, all three cannot.)

Corollary:

Now some males differ in their weighing of the three factors of feminine attractiveness. So they may be able to find their ideal woman. Unfortunately, I just think I have proved that my ideal woman... one that is attractive, intelligent and feminine... is unacheivable.. or at least highly improbable mathematically. :-)

I call this MM's Theorem of Mathematical Feminine Attractiveness, and the last paragragh, I call MM's corollary that his perfect woman does not exist.

You ought to get that published in some kind....

[saskboy]

...some kind of geek magazine.