Mathematical Beauty

Post Reply New Topic

I think this is fascinating. Gotta love that Golden Ratio I'm bad at math but I love the idea of it. It's always correct, there is no room for interpretation or debate. There is only 1 answer to each problem (maybe I'm wrong with some equations but you get the point, compare it to politics or religion).

http://www.intmath.com/numbers/math-of-beauty.php

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_beauty

I agree people can be attracted to different sorts of people. But I do believe we can put a finger on what physical beauty is pretty easily. Take personality out of the equation and it's simple. There are "not very attractive" people and very beautiful people, and most people will always agree on any given individual. But like was mentioned there are cases where people might find obese people more attractive even though it goes against the math.

But yea, you have to factor in personality, fashion, social class, etc etc etc...

I just wouldn't want to be madly in love then it go away, I think that would be sad and to me that seems to be the case in 99% of marriages.

I mean if I don't want kids, there would be no purpose for me to ever date right? I could have friends who are "intimate" (according to the definition I saw earlier) without having sex with them. It's just like people's hormones take control over them. Chemicals in my brain controlling my actions scares me. I want to do what is the correct thing to do and what makes most sense in the long run.

Sigh, I'm going to be an 80 year old virgin

the studies that had people looking at photographs did not really reflect which people are considered attractive in real-life situations beyond a few seconds.

in fact it has been recently found that asymmetric people are considered more attractive than symmetric people because when we see others moving around and talking in real situations, our perception of their visage alters accordingly.

also, it has been found that people's attractiveness rating can skyrocket or plummet once people are acquainted quite well, so the knee-jerk reaction of what is "beautiful" doesn't necessarily linger.

interestingly, even in polls that ask which famous people are most attractive, there isn't universal agreement. for every man that says Angelina Jolie is attractive, another man will say she is fugly. so the supposed "mathematics" behind beauty are not so simple.

if the love "goes away" in marriage, the perceived level of attractiveness is not necessarily a factor in the majority of cases. usually people will change, and their partner's love will follow them. but if a person can't handle a partner changing with time, they might not be suited to having a long-term relationship.

OK - if beauty is the most important quality that you are looking for in a person, by definition you will have to change partners because people generally tend to become less beautiful over time.
Personally, I definitely do NOT want to have kids at ALL - but I would still like to get married because I want to build a relationship with a person. Because my focus is on the relationship, looks are really not that important to me - in fact, I tend to be biased in that I think that very good looking people are stupid... that's a really mean thing to say, but having been overweight most of my life, I have been on the receiving end of a lot of judgement like that so I don't think it is that far out of place.
But yes, people are supposed to grow and change - that is an inevitable fact of life - and you need to adapt to change - from what I've read, that's what makes a good relationship - being able to adapt to changes.

Jessica Simpson isn't that attractive to me.
I'm just not drawn to her. Sure that picture of her face is pretty and some guys probably do find her attractive, I just don't.
Everyone has different tastes or they just go for what will work in a logical sense.

"Aspie-quiz have found that autistics rate Neanderthal faces as more attractive than neurotypicals"

I wonder whether it's true.