improve upon the age/2+7 rule of creepynes

For the discussion of math. Duh.

Moderators: gmalivuk, Moderators General, Prelates

brötchen
Posts: 112
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2009 1:45 pm UTC

improve upon the age/2+7 rule of creepynes

Postby brötchen » Sun Aug 15, 2010 1:33 pm UTC

while the age/2+7 rule works well above the age of 20 it becomes nonsensical bellow 14 so how do we solve this ? the ultimate function of creepynes should approach x=y for small values of x(age) and approach x/2+7=y for higher values of x. what function do you think fits best ?

excuse my surely terrible grammar. English is not my native language

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26820
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: improve upon the age/2+7 rule of creepynes

Postby gmalivuk » Sun Aug 15, 2010 2:55 pm UTC

Well it's creepiness, not whether you're allowed to date that person. So maybe we should just agree that it's creepy when people under 14 date. After all, that *is* what the numbers tell us!
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
Mike_Bson
Posts: 252
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 12:00 pm UTC

Re: improve upon the age/2+7 rule of creepynes

Postby Mike_Bson » Sun Aug 15, 2010 3:09 pm UTC

Why should people under 14 be dating?

brötchen
Posts: 112
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2009 1:45 pm UTC

Re: improve upon the age/2+7 rule of creepynes

Postby brötchen » Sun Aug 15, 2010 3:20 pm UTC

Mike_Bson wrote:Why should people under 14 be dating?

i dont know. but people under 14 do date, its not common but it happens and its not necesarily creepie (at least i dont think so) therefore the rule dosen't seem to describe reality.

User avatar
Eastwinn
Posts: 303
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2008 12:36 am UTC
Location: Maryland

Re: improve upon the age/2+7 rule of creepynes

Postby Eastwinn » Sun Aug 15, 2010 3:38 pm UTC

When they do date, it seems way more innocent than creepy.
http://aselliedraws.tumblr.com/ - surreal sketches and characters.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26820
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: improve upon the age/2+7 rule of creepynes

Postby gmalivuk » Sun Aug 15, 2010 4:20 pm UTC

But it has to be creepy. The rule says so!
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

brötchen
Posts: 112
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2009 1:45 pm UTC

Re: improve upon the age/2+7 rule of creepynes

Postby brötchen » Sun Aug 15, 2010 4:45 pm UTC

The rule doesn't fit observation the rule has to be changed !

Tirian
Posts: 1891
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2008 6:03 pm UTC

Re: improve upon the age/2+7 rule of creepynes

Postby Tirian » Sun Aug 15, 2010 4:51 pm UTC

"Half plus seven" is an unimpeachable physical reality. And, lo, I do find that the sorts of behavior that are icky if done between a 40 year-old man and a 24 year-old woman are icky if they're done by people under 14.

User avatar
nash1429
Posts: 190
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 3:06 am UTC
Location: Flatland
Contact:

Re: improve upon the age/2+7 rule of creepynes

Postby nash1429 » Sun Aug 15, 2010 8:55 pm UTC

Perhaps a more relevent question is whether or not what middle schoolers do actually counts as dating. I think that on very rare occcasions it does, but is that not creepy anyway?

Osha
Posts: 727
Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2008 3:24 am UTC
Location: Boise, Idaho, USA

Re: improve upon the age/2+7 rule of creepynes

Postby Osha » Sun Aug 15, 2010 10:05 pm UTC

Also how does one deal with rounding?
Consider a 23 year and an 18 year old dating: creepy if we're taking the ceiling, not creepy if we're taking the floor, and depends on birthdays if we allow fractional ages.
Using the ceiling seems reasonable but imagine they'd actually started dating when the 23 year old was 22 and the 18 year old was still 18. Then we have a relationship that starts not-creepy, goes to creepy, and eventually goes back to not creepy!
Where is the logic in that I ask you!? O: O: O:

letterX
Posts: 535
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 4:00 am UTC
Location: Ithaca, NY

Re: improve upon the age/2+7 rule of creepynes

Postby letterX » Mon Aug 16, 2010 1:36 am UTC

Continuous variables. If when they started dating, the older person was say, 22.8 years old, whereas the younger was 18.3, then that's creepy (but will soon become not creepy). However, if the first were only 22.4, then they are fine (and will always stay fine).

User avatar
Mike_Bson
Posts: 252
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 12:00 pm UTC

Re: improve upon the age/2+7 rule of creepynes

Postby Mike_Bson » Mon Aug 16, 2010 2:00 am UTC

brötchen wrote:The rule doesn't fit observation the rule has to be changed !

It doesn't have to fit exactly how it is ,now, just how it should be. It's creepy for 20 year olds to date 50 year olds, too, but it still happens.

User avatar
Eastwinn
Posts: 303
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2008 12:36 am UTC
Location: Maryland

Re: improve upon the age/2+7 rule of creepynes

Postby Eastwinn » Mon Aug 16, 2010 3:52 am UTC

Okay, well we need to decide a few things. First off, two people of the same age dating is not creepy, correct? Let's say a 28 year old dating a 14 year old is a creepiness level of 1. What two ages are twice that? What two ages are half that?
http://aselliedraws.tumblr.com/ - surreal sketches and characters.

User avatar
Mike_Bson
Posts: 252
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 12:00 pm UTC

Re: improve upon the age/2+7 rule of creepynes

Postby Mike_Bson » Mon Aug 16, 2010 4:16 am UTC

Eastwinn wrote:Okay, well we need to decide a few things. First off, two people of the same age dating is not creepy, correct?

Just as long as they are 14+.

Let's say a 28 year old dating a 14 year old is a creepiness level of 1. What two ages are twice that? What two ages are half that?

Well, unless you give us an objective formula, I'll just have to guess. Minimum for 28 is 21, so if 14 is a level of 1, then I'd day that 0.5 would be 17.5. For a level of two, I'd say 0 years old. Makes sense:
17.5: 0.5
14: 1
0: 2

As the age gets closer to 21, the creepiness level starts slowing down until it finally reaches 21, where it would be 0.

But I'm just pulling this out of my ass, because you didn't give an objective measure for why 28 and 14 would be a level of 1.

squareroot
Posts: 548
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:04 am UTC
Contact:

Re: improve upon the age/2+7 rule of creepynes

Postby squareroot » Mon Aug 16, 2010 4:23 am UTC

Last year (8th grade) and the year before that, I knew plenty of kids who dated. It's by no means uncommon.
And I, for that matter, find it creepy as well.
<signature content="" style="tag:html;" overused meta />
Good fucking job Will Yu, you found me - __ -

User avatar
nash1429
Posts: 190
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 3:06 am UTC
Location: Flatland
Contact:

Re: improve upon the age/2+7 rule of creepynes

Postby nash1429 » Mon Aug 16, 2010 4:50 am UTC

squareroot wrote:Last year (8th grade) and the year before that, I knew plenty of kids who dated. It's by no means uncommon.
And I, for that matter, find it creepy as well.


In my experience this depends very much on you definition of "date" (and "plenty"): How long do they have to be together? What base do they have to get to? And so forth.

Also, on the subject of a rating scale: the distribution for the scale should be nonlinear and based on the ages of each member of the couple, not just the ratio of the ages. For example, a 30 year-old dating a 20 year-old is less than half as creepy as a 60 year-old dating a 40 year-old.

User avatar
Qaanol
The Cheshirest Catamount
Posts: 3069
Joined: Sat May 09, 2009 11:55 pm UTC

Re: improve upon the age/2+7 rule of creepynes

Postby Qaanol » Mon Aug 16, 2010 5:12 am UTC

When reality and xkcd disagree, xkcd is right and reality must be corrected.
wee free kings

User avatar
Velifer
Posts: 1132
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2007 4:05 pm UTC
Location: 40ºN, 83ºW

Re: improve upon the age/2+7 rule of creepynes

Postby Velifer » Mon Aug 16, 2010 5:05 pm UTC

But then, the closer I get to age 80, the more I look forward to having a 20-something around to wear low-cut tops while she opens the pickle jars. The young nurse/old man thing has to be factored in to the equation somewhere too.
Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies have nothing to lose but their chains -Marx

User avatar
Dason
Posts: 1311
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 7:06 am UTC
Location: ~/

Re: improve upon the age/2+7 rule of creepynes

Postby Dason » Mon Aug 16, 2010 5:27 pm UTC

Velifer wrote:But then, the closer I get to age 80, the more I look forward to having a 20-something around to wear low-cut tops while she opens the pickle jars. The young nurse/old man thing has to be factored in to the equation somewhere too.

How should it be factored in? I mean it's still pretty creepy for an 80 year old guy to be creeping on a 20 year old.
double epsilon = -.0000001;

User avatar
thc
Posts: 643
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 6:01 am UTC

Re: improve upon the age/2+7 rule of creepynes

Postby thc » Tue Aug 17, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Guys, are you even serious?

First of all, the rule was never meant to be applied to 14 years old. Oops. The rule doesn't need to be fixed in that area because 14 years old is out of its domain.

Secondly: SERIOUSLY? The rule is bigoted and retarded, and only for people who feel the need to be judgmental. I would think people on XKCD of all places would be able to get that. What two consenting adults do is their own business and none of yours. The fact that you can conclude an entirely consenting relationship is "creepy" based solely on two numbers says far more about your own biases than anything else.

To re-cap:
-Conclusion literally based on just two numbers
-Consenting adults
-None of your business

masher
Posts: 821
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2007 11:07 pm UTC
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: improve upon the age/2+7 rule of creepynes

Postby masher » Tue Aug 17, 2010 1:36 am UTC

thc wrote:said stuff

Image

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26820
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: improve upon the age/2+7 rule of creepynes

Postby gmalivuk » Tue Aug 17, 2010 2:09 am UTC

thc wrote:Guys, are you even serious?
No. What the hell ever gave you that idea?

The rule is bigoted and retarded
Ironically, so is your use of that slur.

and only for people who feel the need to be judgmental.
Such as yourself?
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
lu6cifer
Posts: 230
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2009 4:03 am UTC
Location: That state with the all-important stone

Re: improve upon the age/2+7 rule of creepynes

Postby lu6cifer » Tue Aug 17, 2010 2:45 am UTC

Me thinks this rule must be made piecewise.
lu6cifer wrote:"Derive" in place of "differentiate" is even worse.

doogly wrote:I'm partial to "throw some d's on that bitch."

User avatar
Velifer
Posts: 1132
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2007 4:05 pm UTC
Location: 40ºN, 83ºW

Re: improve upon the age/2+7 rule of creepynes

Postby Velifer » Tue Aug 17, 2010 1:41 pm UTC

Let's give thc his due, it's clear that creepiness is also dependent on the butthurt quotient of the observer. This is going to require some regression analysis. I'd thought of a probit model, but it's clear observing the extreme values that a logit function is more appropriate. This opens up the opportunity to use polytomous Rasch modelling.
Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies have nothing to lose but their chains -Marx

User avatar
michaelyw
Posts: 95
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2010 12:27 pm UTC
Location: Impending fatherhood

Re: improve upon the age/2+7 rule of creepynes

Postby michaelyw » Tue Aug 17, 2010 1:50 pm UTC

I recently had a chance to apply this rule on Facebook. One of my old Army buddies was distressed because she "might be a Cougar."
I applied Age/2+7 and kindly informed her she wasn't.

For some reason, none of her other FB friends had previously heard of the "rule" and were amazed at how well it worked.
Last edited by michaelyw on Thu Aug 19, 2010 11:47 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
thc
Posts: 643
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 6:01 am UTC

Re: improve upon the age/2+7 rule of creepynes

Postby thc » Thu Aug 19, 2010 12:33 am UTC

Ironically, so is your use of that slur.

Yeah, you're right. My bad.

gmalivuk wrote:
thc wrote:Guys, are you even serious?
No. What the hell ever gave you that idea?


"How should it be factored in? I mean it's still pretty creepy for an 80 year old guy to be creeping on a 20 year old.'"

"It's creepy for 20 year olds to date 50 year olds, too, but it still happens."

So yeah, just because you, personally, are not serious, gmalivuk, doesn't mean other people aren't. But I guess, it's easy to be critical of others words when you're being witty all the time, right? Let's face it: if this were about any other kind demographic (homosexuality, race, gender) people would be up in arms! But this is about age discrimination, so no one cares or makes a deal about it, and therefore, it must be okay to joke about! Chillax!

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26820
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: improve upon the age/2+7 rule of creepynes

Postby gmalivuk » Thu Aug 19, 2010 12:39 am UTC

If this were actually about age discrimination, you *might* have a teeny bit of a point.

But it isn't.

It's about a stupid "rule" of creepiness. And it was posted in the math forum, not the LSR forum. And when someone posts a silly topic, we are silly in response, not serious.

(And if it's about age discrimination, is it also age discrimination to say a 20-year-old shouldn't be allowed to have sex with a 10-year-old?)
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

Syrin
Posts: 290
Joined: Thu May 24, 2007 7:10 pm UTC
Location: Ontario, Canadia

Re: improve upon the age/2+7 rule of creepynes

Postby Syrin » Thu Aug 19, 2010 12:46 am UTC

I wouldn't've minded when I was 10.

Tirian
Posts: 1891
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2008 6:03 pm UTC

Re: improve upon the age/2+7 rule of creepynes

Postby Tirian » Thu Aug 19, 2010 12:57 am UTC

michaelyw wrote:I recently had a chance to apply this rule on Facebook. One of my old Army buddies was distressed because she "might be a Cougar."
I applied Age/2+7 and kindly informed her she wasn't.

For some reason, none of her other FB friends had previously heard of the "rule" and were amazed at well it worked.


The rule is specifically for older men dating younger women. I myself don't mind cross-generational dating, but I think that if the broader society were to make a rule about when Cougarism was creepy it would be significantly more stringent than half plus seven.

User avatar
thc
Posts: 643
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 6:01 am UTC

Re: improve upon the age/2+7 rule of creepynes

Postby thc » Thu Aug 19, 2010 1:28 am UTC

gmalivuk wrote:If this were actually about age discrimination, you *might* have a teeny bit of a point.

But it isn't.

It's about a stupid "rule" of creepiness.

When I asked if/assumed that people were serious, I wasn't referring to the rule, specifically. I was referring to the idea that, (for example) a 20 yo dating a 50 yo is morally repulsive intrinsically due to the difference in age. I think that is a bigoted point of view.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26820
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: improve upon the age/2+7 rule of creepynes

Postby gmalivuk » Thu Aug 19, 2010 1:38 am UTC

Syrin wrote:I wouldn't've minded when I was 10.
Yeah...

The fact that you're totes cool with statutory rape isn't a valid form of argument...

thc wrote:I was referring to the idea that, (for example) a 20 yo dating a 50 yo is morally repulsive intrinsically due to the difference in age. I think that is a bigoted point of view.
Again, if anyone had actually said that, you *might* have a point. But "creepy" is not the same as "morally repulsive". Spiders (for many people) are creepy, but not morally repulsive. Genocide is morally repulsive, but I doubt anyone would call it "creepy".
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

Syrin
Posts: 290
Joined: Thu May 24, 2007 7:10 pm UTC
Location: Ontario, Canadia

Re: improve upon the age/2+7 rule of creepynes

Postby Syrin » Thu Aug 19, 2010 2:26 am UTC

gmalivuk wrote:
Syrin wrote:I wouldn't've minded when I was 10.
Yeah...

The fact that you're totes cool with statutory rape isn't a valid form of argument...

Oh, right, I forgot that this turned into srs mode thread. :/

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26820
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: improve upon the age/2+7 rule of creepynes

Postby gmalivuk » Thu Aug 19, 2010 3:04 am UTC

I'm afraid joking about the rape of a minor is on a slightly different level than joking about a silly rule for evaluating adult relationships...
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
thc
Posts: 643
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 6:01 am UTC

Re: improve upon the age/2+7 rule of creepynes

Postby thc » Thu Aug 19, 2010 4:08 am UTC

Fill me in on your definition of "creepy." To me, it seems like when you apply the word to human behavior (as opposed to spiders), there is a strong judgmental overtone to it. E.g., "that guy is so creepy! He looks like a rapist!" Or, "that guy sends shivers down my spine! I bet he molests children! Creepy!" Perhaps I have the wrong connotations with the word.

Also, someone please explain to me: how is it that a 20 yo getting it on with a 50 yo is more creepy than a 50 yo with a 50 yo (or a 20 yo with a 20 yo)? It seems to me that the only reason one could think that is due to having some sort of emotional/moral response to it. But why would one have such a response? What good reason is there for it, besides just unfairly stereotyping?

squareroot
Posts: 548
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:04 am UTC
Contact:

Re: improve upon the age/2+7 rule of creepynes

Postby squareroot » Thu Aug 19, 2010 7:49 am UTC

Evolution perhaps? Young people are meant to mate with people in a similar age range, to maximize chances of both being fertile and capable parents. Of course, when those traits evolved, not many people lived past thirty. So today, we have a mixture of those who are attracted to the young, and those who are attracted to those the same age. So, when discussing a 20yo with a 50yo, if we're young we'll probably find that creepy because of an instinct to not view older people in a sexual way. And if we're older, there's a good chance the person discussing will be of the sort that they are more attracted to others in a similar age range, which again makes it feel "wrong". Or, if we are older, we might view the 20yo as an innocent, and feel protective of them. Protect them from the other people, and 50yo might hurt them, thus we have an urge to (mentally) avoid a 20yo and a 50yo together.
<signature content="" style="tag:html;" overused meta />
Good fucking job Will Yu, you found me - __ -

User avatar
nash1429
Posts: 190
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 3:06 am UTC
Location: Flatland
Contact:

Re: improve upon the age/2+7 rule of creepynes

Postby nash1429 » Thu Aug 19, 2010 8:26 am UTC

thc wrote:Fill me in on your definition of "creepy." To me, it seems like when you apply the word to human behavior (as opposed to spiders), there is a strong judgmental overtone to it. E.g., "that guy is so creepy! He looks like a rapist!" Or, "that guy sends shivers down my spine! I bet he molests children! Creepy!" Perhaps I have the wrong connotations with the word.


I also find clowns creepy, but I do not judge clowns. I would call anything "creepy" if it was something nonserious that I still wouldn't want to be involved in or to see, especially if it conflicted with my idea of how the world (Western society) works. Large age gaps in relationships are uncommon, and therefore not a part of the usual cultural experience. Also, it seems to me that there is often suspicion that one party in such a relationship was coerced (this situation seeming more common in large-age-gap relationships), although this may not be the case as much as it once was.

Finally: I am not (conciously) racist, sexist, agist, homophobic, anti-semitic, etc. However, I still respect the right of individuals to maintain their own conflicting views in private as long as they do not actively discriminate against a particular group in their public life (work, school, etc.). If you are offended by the topic of this thread (intended to be a humorous attempt to mathematically describe something that cannot fit such a definition), perhaps you should READ SOMETHING ELSE.

User avatar
Velifer
Posts: 1132
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2007 4:05 pm UTC
Location: 40ºN, 83ºW

Re: improve upon the age/2+7 rule of creepynes

Postby Velifer » Thu Aug 19, 2010 1:02 pm UTC

nash1429 wrote:perhaps you should READ SOMETHING ELSE.

Exclusionist!

And I don't see what's wrong with attempting to create a metric on the level of moral affront of the populace on a given range of activities. We do this all the fucking time. The MPAA rates movies, TV shows get rated, Gmal decides fine lines between ok humor and line-crossing humor, and the courts make these determinations about all manner of speech. There are even very good studies on moral outrage and disgust and how they relate to socieconomic class and other dimensions.

In short, this is a serious mathematical issue that we, as mathematicians, must undertake to properly quantify and inform public policy and contribute to the continued welfare and progress of mankind!

/marching band
/fireworks
Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies have nothing to lose but their chains -Marx

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26820
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: improve upon the age/2+7 rule of creepynes

Postby gmalivuk » Thu Aug 19, 2010 2:23 pm UTC

squareroot wrote:Evolution perhaps?
You can bring evolution to bear like that on mores or practices when they are universal or close to universal across all cultures. This one isn't, so you really can't.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
Ulc
Posts: 1301
Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 8:05 pm UTC
Location: Copenhagen university

Re: improve upon the age/2+7 rule of creepynes

Postby Ulc » Thu Aug 19, 2010 4:39 pm UTC

thc wrote:Fill me in on your definition of "creepy." To me, it seems like when you apply the word to human behavior (as opposed to spiders), there is a strong judgmental overtone to it. E.g., "that guy is so creepy! He looks like a rapist!" Or, "that guy sends shivers down my spine! I bet he molests children! Creepy!" Perhaps I have the wrong connotations with the word.


I do not think that very many people share your definition of creepy.

Ignoring sticks in certain private parts, over a rule that is mostly a joke.

Keeping in tradition with mathematicians all over the world, I find that it is far better to simply define us the way out of the problem, rather than solving it, so I propose the following being added to the rule:

Dating = A type of interaction between humans above the legal age of consent in their local area*.

Taadaaa, problem gone!

*Also in tradition with mathematics, this still leaves problems. Namely international waters, but since trying to date each other in international waters is relatively rare, this can safely be ignored.
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it - Aristotle

A White Russian, shades and a bathrobe, what more can you want from life?

User avatar
Velifer
Posts: 1132
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2007 4:05 pm UTC
Location: 40ºN, 83ºW

Re: improve upon the age/2+7 rule of creepynes

Postby Velifer » Fri Aug 20, 2010 4:06 pm UTC

Ulc wrote:Also in tradition with mathematics, this still leaves problems. Namely international waters, but since trying to date each other in international waters is relatively rare, this can safely be ignored.

I suggest it's asymptotic, as a floating NAMBLA conference is a singularity of creepy.
Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies have nothing to lose but their chains -Marx


Return to “Mathematics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests