improve upon the age/2+7 rule of creepynes

For the discussion of math. Duh.

Moderators: gmalivuk, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
silverhammermba
Posts: 178
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 1:16 am UTC

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

Postby silverhammermba » Sat Aug 21, 2010 5:49 am UTC

New idea: a continuous rather than binary creepiness function! Right now we have
[math]C(m, f) = \left\{ \begin{array}{l l}
1 & \quad \text{if $\frac{m}{2} + 7 > f$}\\
0 & \quad \text{otherwise} \end{array} \right.[/math]
But it would be cool if there was a function G with [imath]G(m, f) \in \unicode{x211d}[/imath] such that [imath]G(m, f) < 0 \Leftrightarrow C(m, f) = 1[/imath], for example. Then we could determine how creepy a 30 year old dating an 18 year old is compared to an 18 year old dating a 15 year old.

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

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

Postby brötchen » Sat Aug 21, 2010 2:21 pm UTC

nice idea about the non binary rule. this : http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/the-c ... der-woman/ has some related data . seems like the age/2+7 rule is not quiet up to reality even when only considering ages significantly above 14

User avatar
andrewxc
Posts: 223
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2008 2:39 am UTC
Location: Savage, MD

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

Postby andrewxc » Thu Sep 02, 2010 2:26 am UTC

Mike_Bson wrote:Why should people under 14 be dating?

Just to point out, it's also illegal for anyone under the age of 16 to have sex in the state of New Hampshire. We had a story involving a kid who was 16 and his girlfriend was about a month shy of 16. The girl's father found out and pressed charges against the guy. I think he may have gone to jail (Juvie) for felonious sexual assault AND had to be put on the sexual predators' watch list (must register as a sex offender for the rest of his life).
http://www.cga.ct.gov/2003/olrdata/jud/ ... r-0149.htm
"We never do anything well unless we love doing it for its own sake."
Avatar: I made a "plastic carrier" for Towel Day à la So Long and Thanks for All the Fish.

User avatar
quintopia
Posts: 2906
Joined: Fri Nov 17, 2006 2:53 am UTC
Location: atlanta, ga

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

Postby quintopia » Sun Sep 05, 2010 9:55 pm UTC

age +/- 15% folks

what can I say? I'm all about some symmetry.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26833
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 Sep 05, 2010 11:17 pm UTC

You're saying it's okay for a 20-year-old to date a 17-year-old, but that same 17-year-old can only date up to someone 19.55? Doesn't seem very symmetrical to me...
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 Sep 05, 2010 11:34 pm UTC

Noticed the same thing. Plus 15% or minus about 17.6%?

Alx_xlA
Posts: 69
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 11:22 pm UTC

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

Postby Alx_xlA » Mon Sep 06, 2010 3:06 am UTC

Clearly, the problem here is that we're trying to stick with the "traditional" rule. I propose that we determine the minimum and maximum for each age, and make a function that approximates it as much as possible.

Also, the graph will make a nifty demotivational poster.
My signature contains forty-four characters.

User avatar
quintopia
Posts: 2906
Joined: Fri Nov 17, 2006 2:53 am UTC
Location: atlanta, ga

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

Postby quintopia » Mon Sep 06, 2010 4:45 am UTC

I didn't mean symmetrical in the sense that it's a bijection. It's symmetrical in the sense that I will date as far above my age as I will below. Whether my function overlaps with the (presumably different) function of the person I pursue is one good way of narrowing down potential matches.

User avatar
the tree
Posts: 801
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 6:23 pm UTC
Location: Behind you

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

Postby the tree » Mon Sep 06, 2010 7:16 am UTC

quintopia wrote:I didn't mean symmetrical in the sense that it's a bijection. It's symmetrical in the sense that I will date as far above my age as I will below. Whether my function overlaps with the (presumably different) function of the person I pursue is one good way of narrowing down potential matches.
If you're suggesting that everyone should have their own boundaries, then you're essentially saying there shouldn't be a rule and that's no fun.

User avatar
Macbi
Posts: 941
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 8:32 am UTC
Location: UKvia

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

Postby Macbi » Mon Sep 06, 2010 5:03 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:You're saying it's okay for a 20-year-old to date a 17-year-old, but that same 17-year-old can only date up to someone 19.55? Doesn't seem very symmetrical to me...
Same thing applies to n/2+7 no?
    Indigo is a lie.
    Which idiot decided that websites can't go within 4cm of the edge of the screen?
    There should be a null word, for the question "Is anybody there?" and to see if microphones are on.

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 Sep 06, 2010 5:05 pm UTC

Macbi wrote:
gmalivuk wrote:You're saying it's okay for a 20-year-old to date a 17-year-old, but that same 17-year-old can only date up to someone 19.55? Doesn't seem very symmetrical to me...
Same thing applies to n/2+7 no?

No. n/2+7 tells you the youngest person you can date, nothing more; if you want to find the oldest, then it's 2n-14.

User avatar
quintopia
Posts: 2906
Joined: Fri Nov 17, 2006 2:53 am UTC
Location: atlanta, ga

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

Postby quintopia » Mon Sep 06, 2010 10:29 pm UTC

the tree wrote:
quintopia wrote:I didn't mean symmetrical in the sense that it's a bijection. It's symmetrical in the sense that I will date as far above my age as I will below. Whether my function overlaps with the (presumably different) function of the person I pursue is one good way of narrowing down potential matches.
If you're suggesting that everyone should have their own boundaries, then you're essentially saying there shouldn't be a rule and that's no fun.


I'm not saying there is no rule.

I'm just saying that the general rule is a function of (person,age) and not just (age).


Return to “Mathematics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests